Trains.com

Train lenght?

5254 views
38 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Train lenght?
Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, April 2, 2005 11:44 AM
What is the longest train ever heard of/seen[?]
About how many cars make up a mile[?]
Are there any restrictions to this effect[?]
How many of the newest engines/locomotives take to pull a one mile long train[?][?](like the EMD or SD40-2)
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • From: Defiance Ohio
  • 13,289 posts
Posted by JoeKoh on Saturday, April 2, 2005 12:22 PM
redneck 17
welcome to the forums. the longest train I heard of was N&Ws 500 car coal train.depending upon the car size will determine how many are in a mile and I've seen trains with 4 engines pulling 20 cars and 2 sd40-2s pulling a 8472ft train off the Deshler wye to go to chicago.
stay safe
Joe

Deshler Ohio-crossroads of the B&O Matt eats your fries.YUM! Clinton st viaduct undefeated against too tall trucks!!!(voted to be called the "Clinton St. can opener").

 

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, April 2, 2005 12:59 PM
Looking at some of my old notes, back in 1993 at Wichita, KS Santa Fe's old 524 train (Gainesville,TX-Newton,KS) had 168 cars in tow. This would have been around 9300 feet in length
  • Member since
    January 2005
  • From: Ely, Nv.
  • 6,312 posts
Posted by chad thomas on Saturday, April 2, 2005 1:23 PM
Longest?

I heard about an Austrailian DPU (distributed power) test train that was ove 20,000ft. in length (a one time run).

I also heard a story about a radical move to clear out a hump yard on the Cotton Belt. They made one long train with all the cars in the receiving yard and pushed the whole 5 mile long cut of cars over the hump.


How many per mi.?

depends on car length
40' cars 132
86' cars 60

restrictions?

Yes, its different on different railroads and locations.


It depends on grade and curvature.
On a level & straight track one locomotive can pull 100+ cars (won't break any speed records)
On a steep grade w/ sharp curves one locomotive might only pull 6-8 loaded cars.
  • Member since
    February 2005
  • From: Vancouver Island, BC
  • 23,321 posts
Posted by selector on Saturday, April 2, 2005 2:09 PM
In the 70's, CP ran coal trains from the Kaiser Resources Coal mines in the Rockies near the BC/Alberta border to the ports at Vancouver. I don't know how many gondolas they pulled, but the trains were typically close to 2km in length, were headed by two diesels, and centred by two robots. Lots of curves, and grades approaching 2.5%, I believe. Of course, they had cabooses back then.

Others reading may have more accurate info on this.
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, April 2, 2005 2:20 PM
-A 100 car train is about one mile long depending on the length of the cars.
-The AC 4400 CWs can pull a train about a half mile long by themselves.
-The Union Pacific Big Boy was said to pull a train four miles long by itself-on level
ground...
-As for restrictions on train lengths. I'm sure that varies from railroad to railroad.

trainluver1
  • Member since
    February 2004
  • From: St.Catharines, Ontario
  • 3,770 posts
Posted by Junctionfan on Saturday, April 2, 2005 5:18 PM
I like your name; it's funny. Welcome to the forum.

Longest train I have ever seen is a CN general merchandise (180 cars) using 2 SD75I, 1 C44-9W and a IC SD60 heading north from Toronto to Montreal.

Not sure how long it was but it must have exceeded 10,000 feet. Saw it on a video and there were alot of 86 foot autoboxes as well as autoracks.
Andrew
  • Member since
    February 2004
  • From: St.Catharines, Ontario
  • 3,770 posts
Posted by Junctionfan on Saturday, April 2, 2005 5:30 PM
The typical autorack train around here (Southern Ontario) is around 1 locomotive usually a C44-9W, SD70I or 75I and 80 autoracks which is about 7200 feet however; on occasion, 2 locomotives with 18 articulated autoracks ie NS or TTX/ BTTX (140 feet each) and 90 regular 89 foot autoracks is over 10,000 feet. There is no speed restrictions and are subject to regular speeds.

Andrew
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, April 2, 2005 6:12 PM
The longest train I've ever seen was a 296 car empty coal train at Horseshoe Curve. An SD70M and C40-9W were on the point with two SD40-2's on the rear pushing. Roughly 14,800 feet, figuring every car was about 50 feet long. The train consisted mostly of exConrail G52 coal porters, which weigh about 53,000 lbs. light. Figuring that, the total weight comes out to about 7,800 tons.
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, April 3, 2005 5:25 PM
Hmm.. that should read 196, not 296.
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, April 3, 2005 8:31 PM
Seen UP combine two coal hopper trains before so some where between 200 and 230 cars with two units.
  • Member since
    March 2005
  • From: Canoga Park (Los Angeles)
  • 494 posts
Posted by TheS.P.caboose on Sunday, April 3, 2005 8:53 PM
Longest train as far as cars go was 200. This was at Tehachapi during the seventies. SP had, if memory serves me right, 5 units on the point with swing helpers (3 units) and rear helpers also 3 units.

As far as locomotives go it's 17. A heavey lumber train from the James River Corporation in Portland, OR was carting lumber products to Los Angeles with 70 or 80 cars. The train had 8 units on the head end and a 9 unit set of helpers that they cut out at the west switch at Sylmar.
Regards Gary
  • Member since
    July 2004
  • 803 posts
Posted by GP40-2 on Sunday, April 3, 2005 11:49 PM
An AC4400 would be able to pull a longer train than the Big Boy (180,000 lbs tractive effort vs. 135,000 lbs for the Big Boy)

The Austrailian Ore train mentioned had 682 loaded ore cars and weighed 103,000 tons. It was powered by 6 AC6000's.
  • Member since
    July 2003
  • 964 posts
Posted by TH&B on Monday, April 4, 2005 2:39 AM
That is pretty big!!! I heard South Africa ran a train almost as big and they use narrow gage.
  • Member since
    March 2002
  • From: Harrisburg PA / Dover AFB DE
  • 1,482 posts
Posted by adrianspeeder on Monday, April 4, 2005 6:31 AM
Also, when trains get that long, it could take a really long time to pump up the air for the brakes. And there is something about colder temps even dragging out that process.

Adrianspeeder

USAF TSgt C-17 Aircraft Maintenance Flying Crew Chief & Flightline Avionics Craftsman

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Austin TX
  • 4,941 posts
Posted by spbed on Monday, April 4, 2005 6:46 AM
Actually your question is most difficult to reply to due to many factors. Take a coal train rail cars are short & stubby but they carry 100 Ts or more loads per car. OTH autorackers are much longer then coal cars but also much lighter so you can have longer auto rackers since there is far less weight with 2 locos but a coal train may need 3 to do the same job. Also all locos do not have the same capacity to pull so that is another consideration to take into account when you ask a question like you did. [:)] [:D]

Originally posted by CSXtrainredneck17
[

Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR  Austin TX Sub

  • Member since
    April 2001
  • From: US
  • 2,849 posts
Posted by wabash1 on Monday, April 4, 2005 9:11 AM
if you would take 2 dash 9 engines you can get a 100 car coal train up and runing track speed easier than you can a 75-80 car auto rack train. and you might get that auto rack train to track speed. most every one on here keeps talking about what type of power ( mostly newer engines) and weight of train . the main facter in powering a train is of course weight then the size. 70 parachutes( auto racks) takes a long time to get up to speed and in some cases if the wind is blowing you will never reach track speed. if your train is long enough the drag from the rail is enough to try and overcome. the is a formula to figure how much a engine will pull. but it only means that what it will pull not how fast it will pull it
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, April 12, 2005 5:21 PM
thanks for the info
  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 24,980 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Tuesday, April 12, 2005 5:30 PM
Train size is a function of the physical characteristics and operation philosophy of the particular railroad and service being provided.

In single track territory, siding size will normally limit train size.

In other territories terrain or the size of terminal tracks will be the practical limiting factors to train size.

Bigger is not always better.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    September 2002
  • From: CANADA
  • 126 posts
Posted by Grinandbearit on Tuesday, April 12, 2005 8:37 PM
On Sunday afternoon April 10, CN 149 (double stacks)running from Montreal to Chicago was 11,000 ft long. It had three engines, a Dash -8 and two Sd75s and was doing at least 55mph through Kingston.
  • Member since
    August 2004
  • From: Phoenix, Arizona
  • 1,989 posts
Posted by canazar on Wednesday, April 13, 2005 2:22 AM
I unfortunaly have nothing to contribute to this thread, but i Was compelled to comment on BlatACD graphic in his signiature.... That is just plain funny, I dont care who you are !!

Of course, i think of the fellow in another thread who had to kick someone off his yard for being stupid and sitting in the middle of active tracks...

John k

Best Regards, Big John

Kiva Valley Railway- Freelanced road in central Arizona.  Visit the link to see my MR forum thread on The Building of the Whitton Branch on the  Kiva Valley Railway

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, April 13, 2005 9:31 AM
It's in the Guiness Book, I think it was on N&W back in the 70's: about 300 cars of coal, 4 locos up front and 2 sets of 2 locos 1/3 and 2/3 in train....Get the women and chidren off the street..

Basically, CSX limits it's train to 8500 to 9000 feet, with engines, tonnage is usually not critical. My own experience: 1975 Waycross Ga. to High Springs Fl, train 307, 205 cars, 4 locos, dark territory at night, and a cushioned cab....what a ride.
  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 24,885 posts
Posted by tree68 on Wednesday, April 13, 2005 10:55 AM
Something over 180 cars (I lost count) - empty coal hoppers headed south on the IC main behind just two Geeps, which were pulling for all they were worth. Normally the unit coal trains ran around 90 cars, so I can only guess that they were short motive power on the north end (Chicago) and had joined two trains worth to take them south.

LarryWhistling
Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) 
Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you
My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date
Come ride the rails with me!
There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...

  • Member since
    March 2004
  • From: Indianapolis, Indiana
  • 2,434 posts
Posted by gabe on Wednesday, April 13, 2005 10:59 AM
Wow, what I would give to see two Geeps pull a 180+ car coal drag.

I guess in the flat lands of Illinois you can get away with that.

Gabe
  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 24,885 posts
Posted by tree68 on Wednesday, April 13, 2005 11:11 AM
QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe

Wow, what I would give to see two Geeps pull a 180+ car coal drag.
I guess in the flat lands of Illinois you can get away with that.
Gabe

I seriously doubt that the crew was enjoying it. Had the hoppers been loaded, I'd have been witness to a stall... And don't get fooled by that "flatlands of Illinois" stuff- coming south into Rantoul, IL is a lloonngg upgrade...

LarryWhistling
Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) 
Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you
My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date
Come ride the rails with me!
There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...

  • Member since
    January 2004
  • From: NY
  • 913 posts
Posted by dwil89 on Wednesday, April 13, 2005 11:13 AM
NS occasionally runs stack trains well over 10.,000 feet on the Pittsburgh Line. I have witnessed a couple of Eastbound Stacktrains call out the defect detector at Lilly, MP 253.1, when the head end is passing the Station Inn at Cresson at MP 251. Once in awhile, an Eastbound Autorack will rival that length... Power for these trains is usually 2 or three Widecabs on the head-end and perhaps a pair of SD40-2 pushers on the rear, depending on tonnage....Dave Williams @ nsaltoonajohnstown@yahoogroups.com
David J. Williams http://groups.yahoo.com/group/nsaltoonajohnstown
  • Member since
    August 2003
  • From: Melbourne, Australia
  • 20 posts
Posted by bkdavidson on Thursday, May 12, 2005 6:58 PM
In the December 03 edition of the Australian "Railway Digest" the following statement appeared:

"...the world's longest train with eight GE AC6000CW locomotives and 682 ore cars operated over 275 kilometres in the Newman to Port Headland section on 21 June 2001. The train length was 7.353 kilometres."

Apparently the ore cars were betreen 100 and 120 tonnes. I calculate this to be, with locos, around 80,000 tonnes. The length in miles is approx. 4.57 miles.

Does anyone know if this has been surpassed since 2001 either in Australia or the US or anywhere else for that matter?

Davo.
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, May 12, 2005 10:41 PM
I don't think so...TRAINS had a picture in a back issue of that Aussie beast.

I do wonder how long it took to pump that train up.

I also wonder if it was done as some kind of test, as a publicity gimmick, or if a train like that is really economically feasible. (Yeah I know... the more cars, the less locomotives, the cheaper it is.) I also wonder what the crew size was. Somehow I doubt there were only two guys on board, with the division chief filing his nails in an office reaching over to his speaker phone saying, "Hey, Mark...we got a 4-5 mile long train headed your way." to a dispatcher.

I can imagine the yardmaster at the receiving end was thrilled too.

Erik
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Friday, May 13, 2005 1:41 AM
God I loved working for the Santa Fe , short fast trains! This long monsters are nitemares!
  • Member since
    July 2004
  • From: chicagoland
  • 48 posts
Posted by UP_North on Saturday, May 14, 2005 12:45 AM
Long, heavy, underpowered trains are much easier to run than short and fast trains. I'm lazy and its much easier to put in the 8th notch and never get to track speed than always messing with the throttle on a light train.

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy