Since ATSF did fabricate the hoods for the CF7 project, it may be safe to assume that they would have done the same for repowered non-EMD switchers.
Did Santa Fe going to make GP hoods for repowered switchers or they going to something else. Gary
Flintlock76Actually, that should be "BEEP-BEEP!"
Not as grand, of course, as Wagnerian opera, or this... from the great age of WPLJ (likely inspired by the Robin Williams cover of 'Fire')
Or the soliloquy in the Kix song "Yeah Yeah Yeah" -- the original version being the best rendition...
.
Actually, that should be "BEEP-BEEP!"
Perception and perspective are everything. When someone says "beep" to me the first thing I think of is this:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/88/Tobeepornottobeep.jpg
http://www.readymadetoys.com/o-gauge-diesel.html
They used the frame and cab from a retired Baldwin VO1000 which wa long engough and tall enough to accmodeate the EMD 567 prime mover and radiators. Put the retired GP7 hod on it and you have a useful switcher.
Caldreamer
M636CIn fact ATSF wanted to use standard EMD parts. They used a 16-567BC engine from a GP7 so they used a GP7 style hood which had a standard GP7 cooling system including the four 36" fans.
Other railroads successfully rebuilt VO1000s with 12-cylinder EMD engines, probably for perceived 'apples-to-apples' switcher capacity (Reading's were nominally the same power as SW900s, IIRC). The ATSF design represented, like the FM H-20-44, an end-cab unit with road-unit horsepower capability.
While I don't have an answer, I imagine the primary reason is that she had a 16 cylinder 567 from a retired Santa Fe F unit rather than a 12 cylinder 567.
That of course means a larger diesel, but also a larger radiator system and some other components. And that means a larger long hood than a factory built EMD switcher required.
For a comparison, if you can locate the frame length of EMD's own factory-built take on the concept with the styling of a switcher (The TR1 with a 16-567 and Blomberg B road trucks), it will be a fair bit longer than the 48' frame of a VO-1000.
Visually it's quite noticeable the extra frame length compared to the Beep, but I don't have any dimension data for that obscure model.
Edit: Took too long composing my reply in a futile attempt to find the length of the TR1 in a few books. Looks like M636C has you covered with a similar reason that boils down to the use of the larger 16 cylinder engine.
IA and eastern When the Santa Fe Beep was built it was built as a switcher. Why was it not built with hood like SW1200. I am not an engineer so what details am i missing. Gary
When the Santa Fe Beep was built it was built as a switcher. Why was it not built with hood like SW1200. I am not an engineer so what details am i missing. Gary
If it had been rebuilt with a switcher hood it would have been a "BSW" which can't be pronounced...
In fact ATSF wanted to use standard EMD parts. They used a 16-567BC engine from a GP7 so they used a GP7 style hood which had a standard GP7 cooling system including the four 36" fans.
They could have used a 12-645 from an SW1500 which would have allowed them to use a switcher hood and cooling system, but those components would probably have cost more than the GP7 components they did use.
The Baldwin already had a tall hood only slightly lower than the new EMD hood, so no visibility was lost in the conversion.
The electric fans in the GP7 would be a maintenance advantage compared to the mechanical fans in EMD switchers. Union Pacific fitted GP7 type fans to their "SW10" conversions of SW9s and other older EMD switchers to reduce maintenance costs.
Peter
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.