The "Common pool" argument is bogus. I have noted previously that UP GE locomotives are serviced here. RTA has moved cars and locomotives before; and has not refrained from operating mixed fleets of MPI and EMD locomotives.
Furthermore, Amtrak's universal cab signaling provides for both the xCNW and UP systems, should UP ever upgrade the former to four the aspects of the latter.
What about these, were they P40's or P42's ?
Seams I recall reading that the Genesis series was lighter than the F-40 series, so weight restrictions should be less of a problem where lines are or have run F-40s?
Have fun with your trains
HarveyK400 wrote: The "Common pool" argument is bogus. I have noted previously that UP GE locomotives are serviced here. RTA has moved cars and locomotives before; and has not refrained from operating mixed fleets of MPI and EMD locomotives. Furthermore, Amtrak's universal cab signaling provides for both the xCNW and UP systems, should UP ever upgrade the former to four the aspects of the latter.
The common pool argument is the fact that engines on the UP North, Northwest and West lines are all out of the same engine pool. The P40's are too heavy for the North line, so they can not be included in the UP pool. If the common pool argument was indeed "bogus" you would have seen MP36's running on just the West line by now.
An "expensive model collector"
Metra doesn't gain that much with an MP36 or P40 to matter on the Union Pacific West Line which has few expresses or the longest trains. Regardless, P40's could be employed on the UP West Line which answers the the initial question of where.
Just because Metra and UP choose to not include MP36's in the "pool" doesn't mean they can't. How come it's so bad for the UP and perfectly okay for other diesel lines? Why not put all the MP36's on the Milwaukee District for example and move the F40's to the other lines? The argument of pooling is bogus because the principle is applied inconsistently.
The real problem as I stated before is the Northwest Line with the heaviest trains and grades where the more significant increase to 4,000 hp (25%) would be welcome. Unfortunately, the bridges at Division, North, Armitage, and probably Courtland-Ashland need to be rebuilt or strengthened first. At least one train runs with two F40's.
HarveyK400 wrote: Metra doesn't gain that much with an MP36 or P40 to matter on the Union Pacific West Line which has few expresses or the longest trains. Regardless, P40's could be employed on the UP West Line which answers the the initial question of where.Just because Metra and UP choose to not include MP36's in the "pool" doesn't mean they can't. How come it's so bad for the UP and perfectly okay for other diesel lines? Why not put all the MP36's on the Milwaukee District for example and move the F40's to the other lines? The argument of pooling is bogus because the principle is applied inconsistently.
Well if the P40 would add little to the UP west line, then why bother? You want to add a locomotive that doesn't add much AND is restriced to running on just one line? As for the UP pool, you should note that almost never is a engine moved from the UP pool. It is the same locomotives almost all the time. The same can not be said for other lines. There has to be reasons for this.
(Laughing), uh we're still using F40PH-2's in Canada on VIA Rail, and in the east they use P42 Genesis loco's.
Here's a good sign for American railfans to visit Canada
Of course nothing beats my memories of these units
Did someone from Metra say the reason for two locomotives was protection power? If so, it must have been a quick and incomplete response.
Protection power doesn't fit the BNSF, RID, MDN, MDW or UPNW examples I've seen of heavy 8-10 car trains at the peak of the rush hour. The UPNW might speed up service with a 2nd unit on three more heavy trains including the big one from McHenry. BNSF also ran double units on long weekend trains during the Taste of Chicago and July 3rd to maintain some semblence to the schedule.
The SWS runs one train with two locomotives that flips at 153rd-Orland Park for a second, later peak run. One of the BNSF two-unit trains may flip at Downers Grove on an earlier run. These may be examples of rolling protection to insure the equipment gets back for the second trip if one unit fails.
Being in the right place may not be a fixed location or terminal, but on a crucial train.
I've got to agree with the "nobody" idea to a point. ConDOT and Metro North are the only lines I can see buying any of them, unless VIA wants to get rid of their F40s and gets a really good deal. They really don't fit any other commuter line's power profiles. They're not EMD powered, they're built for long haul and finally they don't meet the new EPA standards.
I just hope a few of them get saved by museums and such.
Cheers!
~METRO