Quick Question:
Why is it that BNSF , on the cab, labels all (or most of) their DASH 9-44CW's as C44-9W's?
Acela
The timbers beneath the rails are not the only ties that bind on the railroad. --Robert S. McGonigal
Acela026 Quick Question: Why is it that BNSF , on the cab, labels all (or most of) their DASH 9-44CW's as C44-9W's? Acela
I think it's just up to railroad preference, really. Both names are technically correct. Most I've seen, though, say DASH 9-44CW. I have at least three or four of them on camera when I went to Joliet back in May that all say DASH 9-44CW.
The preference is usually driven by two factors. One is the need to have a scheme that the employees can remember and that may mean creating one totally different from the builder's model designation. This was more common in the early days of diesels when there were a handful of builders. In this case, continuing the GE post-U series designations works. B23-7, C30-7, B40-8, C40-8W, C44-9W all fit the same, easily understood scheme.
The second is that the builder's scheme does not fit in the space allocated for it in the RR's computer systems. That was the case at Conrail and is likely at BNSF. You only need 6 characters to store any model made by EMD and GE up to the time GE's marketing decided the "Dash" went in the front as a word. An alternate I have seen elsewhere is to abbreviate "Dash" as "D". It is a really big deal to increase the field size in all the systems that use or keep locomotive model designation.
GE didn't do anyone any favors by changing their model designations....
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
And now for something completely different: Several roads ignored the builders' model designations and devised their own class systems using an alphanumeric code based on builder, service, horsepower and wheel arrangement. SP, MILW and PC used similar systems.
CSSHEGEWISCH And now for something completely different: Several roads ignored the builders' model designations and devised their own class systems using an alphanumeric code based on builder, service, horsepower and wheel arrangement. SP, MILW and PC used similar systems.
Most all of the Fallen Flag carriers had their own diesel classification schemes that did not reference the builders model designations during the early days of dieselization.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
I have always been puzzled by the recent GE locomotive designations. Does anyone know the logic behind names such as DASH 9-44CW? I understand the CC truck and wide cab initials but I do not understand the reason for spelling out the word DASH and also using a hyphen.
Firesteel I have always been puzzled by the recent GE locomotive designations. Does anyone know the logic behind names such as DASH 9-44CW? I understand the CC truck and wide cab initials but I do not understand the reason for spelling out the word DASH and also using a hyphen.
It's for the same reason that the AC4400CW wasn't called a DASH 9-44ACCW...I.e the marketing department at GE thought it sounded good. Neither GE nor EMD have used completely logical and sequential locomotive naming conventions over the years, it doesn't seem to bother Railroad Mechanical managers but it drives railfans buggy....
"I Often Dream of Trains"-From the Album of the Same Name by Robyn Hitchcock
Canadian National has locomotive designation system that clearly intended for internal use only. It takes a specific state of mind to decode the CNR locomotive designations in a glance.
Andrew
Watch my videos on-line at https://www.youtube.com/user/AndrewNeilFalconer
Andrew Falconer Canadian National has locomotive designation system that clearly intended for internal use only. It takes a specific state of mind to decode the CNR locomotive designations in a glance. Andrew
The CN class system is not that different from those used on PC, SP, MILW and a few others. It is primarily based on builder, service and horsepower. I will concede that I'm not sure of the logic behind the suffixes on CN classes.
Union Pacific does the same thing and likes to use their own designations, for example they designate the ES44AC as C45ACCTE.
Scott EspinRailfan - Reno NV
Espins1 - Welcome to trains.com!
Darren (BLHS & CRRM Lifetime Member)
Delaware and Hudson Virtual Museum (DHVM), Railroad Adventures (RRAdventures)
My Blog
Wow, old thread.
More specifically, UP calls an AC4400CW a C44AC. If it has the Continuous Tractive effort software, then it's a C44ACCTE. The Evo series is a C45AC just to distinguish them and all of them have CTE software, so they are all C45ACCTEs.
I believe that they call Dash 9s C44-9.
For EMD, they call their ECO rebuilds SD59MX which makes sense, because a 6 axle loco 12-710 engine making ~3200HP would have traditionally been called an SD59 just as a 6 axle 12-645 turbo is an SD39. EMD's nomenclature calls it an SD32ECO which is of course not related to any traditional EMD naming.
GE's marketing department circa the Dash naming needs to be smacked really really hard.
One thing that no one has mentioned - the computer systems that each carrier uses to measure and run their business. Every computer system has field limits for various pieces of data - locomotive designation is one such field of data. Some carriers computer systems may allocate 6 characters for the designation, other may allow 7 or 8 or 9 or more....each carrier has their own computer system requirements; and assign model designations to work within their computer system.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.