It depends on when we're talking about too. 1st generation diesels (diesels built to replace steam engines) generally didn't last that long; around 1960 builders started making diesels designed to replace the 1st generation diesels. These new engines were generally much more reliable, and had more horsepower. Also, engines by minority builders like Baldwin weren't as desirable to keep after the builder quit making the engines and repair parts to keep existing engines running.
It also depends on the nature of the railroad's work. Erie Mining Co. built it's taconite railroad in the mid-1950's, using brand-new EMD F-9 diesels for mainline tac trains. Because the Great Lakes freeze over, they couldn't ship out taconite pellets during several months in the winter, so had time to work on the diesels to keep them in top shape. Some of these F-9s from 1954 were kept on the job until taconite production ended in 2002.
The road to to success is always under construction. _____________________________________________________________________________ When the going gets tough, the tough use duct tape.
I would have to agree that this is way to many variables here. Age does not seem to be a issue when buying a locomotive if it has a good maintenance record. I know there is many locomotives that are 40 or 50 years old but only have a few hundred miles on them. Many of these were used by the US Army or US Navy. They would only be used a few times a year yet maintained very well.
Some used locomotives come with spare parts with the deal such as generators and pistons. Sometimes they even have another dead locomotive for spare parts that is included with the deal. Many used locomotives often are sold just a year or two after being rebuilt. I remember earlier this year reading about two F units that were totally rebuilt by VIA rail for over a million a piece. For what ever reason they were sold and were only going for a hundred thousand or so to purchase.
A blue carded old Alco is worth just as much as a worn out SD40-2. Locomotive are just like cars. You need something that will take you from point A to B. Most people don't care what kind of car takes them there but it better be dependable.
Check out Ozark railcar and take a look at the locomotives they have for sale. You will get a good idea what locomotives are worth gold and which ones are worth silver. http://www.ozarkmountainrailcar.com/
zrail About how long would a small class 1/regional railroad keep a group of locomotives before buying new ones to replace them. Also how long would they keep a locomotive before selling/rebuilding it?
About how long would a small class 1/regional railroad keep a group of locomotives before buying new ones to replace them. Also how long would they keep a locomotive before selling/rebuilding it?
It would keep them until there was an opportunity that offered a decent ROI.
You can keep locos running indefinitely - they are not like automobiles that are "disposable". In fact, a typical locomotive gets overhauled a few times in it's life.
The factors that drive the ROI are generally fuel, maintenance costs, and replacement ratio. If you have a deal at hand where new or used locos would cost you less in the long run than the ones you have, you might just do the deal. (Actually, they have to save you enough to provide a good ROI on the capital you'd have to lay out - better than other projects you might have available to you)
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
samfp1943 ndbprrIIRC there is a difference between class 1 and a regional. The big boys lease based on a 15 year depreciation schedule. At that time they can choose to get rid of the engine, rebuild it and consider it new, or continue to run it if there are no major defects. The fact that early GP engines are still in service say's there is really no limit if rebuilt properly and it meets a need. Kind of an unstated issue in this discussion for diesel engine replacement, Th track configurations of the smaller lines physical plant ( switch configurations and actual radii of tracks; not to mention weight of the rails(?). These issues would preclude use of the larger and heavier engines. Older, smaller, locomotives would fit into the operational limitations of smaller, less well financed lines. The question is when the current crop of smaller locomotives begin to wear out and become more maintenance intensive, what will be the available types to rep[lace them with? Bear in mind the recent story on the TRAINS Newswire referencing the sale of a large number of two-axle units(75 locomotives) to 'Larrys Truck&Electric' in McDonald, Ohio. I would bet some will be caniballized to feed parts into the secondary parts supply chain, while some of the other units, those in better shape will be overhauled and placed for sale (?). I would bet that a lot od smaller short lines will not get into the current crop of EMD and GE's in the 4,000 Hp (give or take) class, simply because they will be too heavy on the short lines infrastructure and track. You have to wonder if they will be candidates to somehow be reconfigured into B-B+B-B wheel configurations, and possibly de-powered(?) Similar to some of their number that have been exported to South America ( ie: Brazil). . Would there be enough of a market to build an entirely new class of B+B locomotives?
ndbprrIIRC there is a difference between class 1 and a regional. The big boys lease based on a 15 year depreciation schedule. At that time they can choose to get rid of the engine, rebuild it and consider it new, or continue to run it if there are no major defects. The fact that early GP engines are still in service say's there is really no limit if rebuilt properly and it meets a need.
Kind of an unstated issue in this discussion for diesel engine replacement, Th track configurations of the smaller lines physical plant ( switch configurations and actual radii of tracks; not to mention weight of the rails(?). These issues would preclude use of the larger and heavier engines. Older, smaller, locomotives would fit into the operational limitations of smaller, less well financed lines.
The question is when the current crop of smaller locomotives begin to wear out and become more maintenance intensive, what will be the available types to rep[lace them with? Bear in mind the recent story on the TRAINS Newswire referencing the sale of a large number of two-axle units(75 locomotives) to 'Larrys Truck&Electric' in McDonald, Ohio.
I would bet some will be caniballized to feed parts into the secondary parts supply chain, while some of the other units, those in better shape will be overhauled and placed for sale (?). I would bet that a lot od smaller short lines will not get into the current crop of EMD and GE's in the 4,000 Hp (give or take) class, simply because they will be too heavy on the short lines infrastructure and track.
You have to wonder if they will be candidates to somehow be reconfigured into B-B+B-B wheel configurations, and possibly de-powered(?) Similar to some of their number that have been exported to South America ( ie: Brazil). .
Would there be enough of a market to build an entirely new class of B+B locomotives?
Maybe not a new class exactly but EMD/Progress Rail is building an order of GP22ECO units for CP that are almost entirely brand new locomotives. The locomotives will have new frames,engines,cabs,electrical and auxiliary systems. The only used components will be remanufactured trucks and traction motors from retired GP9's. So if a regional operator wanted to buy new they could but I doubt a smaller,independent shortline could afford new locomotives..
"I Often Dream of Trains"-From the Album of the Same Name by Robyn Hitchcock
If they got the diesels in the late 40's/early 50's, most of them would have been covered wagons(F units). Later purchases would have been GP's. Typically, most railroads replace their locomotives on a 15-20 year cycle. So some of those F's were nearing the 15 year mark in 1954, and were traded in on GP35's. Both WM and D&RGW did just that.. Another operational reason was to purge the fleet of F units, as they were limited(not good running in reverse on a local), and to replace a power assembly usually meant pulling the diesel out of the car body. A power assembly in a GP could be pulled with the access doors being open. Almost as old GP7 or GP9 engines many time got an upgrade as they were considered still useful. WM had a number of older GP's that got the 'chop nose' treatment as they were shopped.
When I worked for the CB&Q in the late 60's, they only had 3 F7's still on the roster. The rest of the F's had been traded in on newer power.
Jim
Modeling BNSF and Milwaukee Road in SW Wisconsin
Well i was thinking more of smaller railways in the 70's, like Western Maryland and DRGW. The locomotives would be kept in good condition. Also for example, a small railway has already dieselized sometime in early 50's, would there then be any reasons for geting GP35's or GP38's?
There are way too many variables here:
The DM&E 'dieselized' with used 're-build' SD7 & SD9(ex C&NW/Milw) engines that were in pretty sorry condition when they got them. They had to use 5-8 of them to get a road freight over the line. They later leased/purchased SD40/SD40-2 engines as replacements about 10 years later. They still are basically powering their road trains with SD40/SD40-2 engines(even under CP management).
You asked about 'small' Class 1 railroads. BNSF/UP/CP/CN/NS/CSX are the big Class 1 lines. I think KCS & MRL may be considered Class 1 as well(based on reported financials). Iowa Interstate has been purchasing new GEVO's, and MRL has purchased new SD70ACe's. FEC has also purchased new EMD engines, but most regional carriers purchase used power...
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.