short nose

[cabforward]

what is the use of the short nose in road switchers? does it give more power than yard switchers? how was the short nose reduced in size to allow better vision from the cab? is the short nose on the way out? are switchers now going to have the streamliner appearance with a walkway? if yard switchers are less powerful than road models, how can they manage long strings of cars in a yard? seems like they would need the same power pulling power as a bigger loco, albeit a shorter distance..

[mccannt]

1. The short nose on road switchers helped provide collision protection for the crew in the cab, compared to a box-cab unit with the cab set right in the nose. Some variations used for passenger service had a steam generator in the nose.

2. Most railroads has their hood units set to operate short hood forward. Several railroads, most notably Southern and Norfolk & Western, had their hood unit locomotives set up to operate long hood forward.

3. The first low-nose units were done in house by various railroads to provide increased visibility. The major locomotive manufacturers began offering low nose versions in the late 1950s/early 1960s, and it became the industry standard (although both Southern and Norfolk & Western continued to insist on high nose units for years afterward).

4. The short-nosed standard, or "spartan" cab found on road switchers from the 1960s on began to disappear in the late 1980s, when units equipped with wide cabs began to appear. The so-called "comfort cab" first appeared in the late 1960s on the EMD FP45, F45 and DDA40X units, but was used mainly in Canada. The wide-cab road unit is now the industry standard. Norfolk Southern, the sucessor to both Southern and Norfolk & Western, was the last railroad to order new standard-cab locomotives.

5. Both major locomotive builders, EMD and GE, offer mainly road units now, although some smaller companies do offer yard switcher versions. Most railroads have opted to rebuild their existing yard switchers or replace them with older road switchers. The practice varies from railroad to railroad. One, the Long Island RR, for many years even used some of its yard switcher models in commuter service!

6. Most rail yards are built as flat switching facilities, so you do not have the elevation variations found on main lines. A yard switcher of less horsepower then a larger road locomotive can still move big strings of cars around a flat yard with little effort. Hump yards, wth their elevated "humps" for sorting cars, do require larger locomotives or several yard switchers operating together.

[edblysard]

Depends upon your definition of switcher. Most true "switchers" are gone, except in industry service. What most roads use now are their older road switchers, which is exactly what its name implies, both a switch motor and road power. They are two distinct classes of locomotives, each designed for a specific purpose. The most common of theroad switch motors left are GP38s a EMD product, the last true road/switch motor. The short hood can contain a toilet, radio equipment, remote/ radio equipment. Older road switchers used on passenger trains had a steam generator in there also. A swtich motor, on the other hand, is designed for that purpose only, although it can be used, if needed, as a transfer unit, or for local switching of industries. These are the Alco s1, s2 and such, with EMD having the lions share of products, the NW1, SW6, SW9, SW12, MP15. These were the last switch motors built in any quanity. They have no short hood, instead the cab has a flat rear wall, and they are run long hood forward most of the time, for crash protection. The only "new" switch motors I know of are the ones we have here at the Port, from MK Rail, who became Boisie Locomotive, now Motive Power Inc, ( a subsidiary of wabtec corp.)These are model class MK1500D, and MK2000AC, a 1500 horsepower dc current, four axle unit and a 2000hp ac six axle unit using Catipillar diesels. We have 24 units, #s9601 thru 9624, the other 10 were on the HBT roster. We lease the MK2000AC,#1602, and are currently testing EMDs version of the same unit, also Cat powered, CEFX's #2017 and 2016, with BB trucks, 2000hp dc.If you want a look at theses last switch motors, built new in 1996, use your search engine, type in PTRA, and look at the listing from southwest shortlines.
Have fun, hope this helped.
Ed

[Anonymous]

Ed, Can true switchers also be used as road engines? I recently seen a CXS train that had four engines in the front. One of the engines in the middle was shaped like you descibed with no hood, it was also much smaller then the other three. Are true yard switchers geared to run at high speeds they would see on the road?
TIM A

[Jackflash]

Depends on the gear ratio between the pinion
and ring gear on the inside the wheel, probably
yes, also depends on the truck style, a rigid
truck used on true yard engines might be
restricted to 45 MPH. If the gear ratio were
the same on differnt locomotives you would
have no problems MU them together. The train
you saw might have had special instructions
to not exceed a certain MPH. jackflash

[edblysard]

Tim, depends on the gear raito, if it matched the other engines, yes. Most of the time they do match, it cheaper to maintain and replace gears and pinions that way. You didnt mention if the switch engine was running, on line so to speak. If it was, then they were using it as power, if not, it was just being moved, you would want the "dead in tow" motor close to the head end, it will be easier to cut it out when it gets where its going, and you really dont want that much dead weight on the rear. The last few switch motors build had hp ratings around 1200 to 1500 hp, last two or three of them together, and you can move a lot of weight. If you get the chance, look at the trucks, (wheel assembly) if it has a ridged frame and coil springs at each end, it is a AAR style truck, rides hard, and would have a speed restriction for that motor. If it has leaf springs in the middle, with coils at each end, it is most likley a blomberg style B truck, used on everything from F and E units to most of the 4 axle freight motors EMD built. We have those type on our switch motors, with dual clasp brakes, they came off of old F units, the streamlined bulldog nosed engines you see in a lot of photos. A good source for photos and descriptions would be "Union Pacific Switchers and Slugs" by Don Strack, published by withers publishing. You should be able to buy a copy at your local train model shop.
Stay frosty,
Ed

[Jackflash]

Even if the gear ratio was different you could
still MU, but the entire consist would be
restricted to the speed of the engine having
the most restricted (in speed )gear ratio
jackflash

[edblysard]

Didnt know that, so that poses a question of my own, would you have to run off the "slower" motor, using it as a controling unit, or could you mix it in the consist?
Havent gotten on the seatbox, yet....
Ed

[edblysard]

Duh! Just realized that 30mph is still 30mph, regardless of the raito, and because the throttle settings are the same, ie notch 5, notch 8, and the controling unit uses the electrical connections to set speed via the govenor, it wouldnt matter where in the consist the "slower" unit was...
still numb from work,
Ed

[cabforward]

the picture i have is an emd-mp15.. this is from "the r.r.", by j.h. armstrong, '93.. a text used by the jccc in overland park, ks to train conds. told me a lot, not bad for $30.. this was the only text the instructor recommended.. other material was presented via overhead.. it seems r.rs. called them 'yard goats', from striking cars all day long..

i have not kept up with motive power since the early '60s.. back then "trains" had pictorials on the latest thing from emd, the gp20..

because road units seemed more powerful, i believed the snub nose held another engine to pull more cars.. of course, i was more confused when the snub nose was trimmed, as it seemed they had to take out part of the engine.. csx has models similar to the mp15 in my area.. 2 frequently work in tandem in the yard.. it seems these models work so well for so long, r.rs. prefer to repair them than invest in new units..

(( on one hand, i enjoy reading long discussions about technical aspects of procedure, eqpt. and the life.. on the other hand, it nags me that i can't be part of this livelihood.. i really missed the train this time around.. ))

[Anonymous]

I've used MP15's MU'd with GP38 or 40's on local turnaround service.(get your cameras, kids, that doesn't happen often.) SW1500's and MP15's (and maybe other "modern" switchers have a selector switch for switching or road service. In switching mode, the unit doesn't transition. If you forget to set it, at higher speeds it just goes along for the ride. Usually, when you see a yard engine in a consist on CSX, it's on its way to Cumberland or Huntington or such for form work, so they aren't usually actually working. By the way, the old B&O liked their GP7's and GP9 with long nose forward, except for a few dual control units left over from passenger days; even they were designated long nose front. NYC also ran GP's long nose front. The short nose had a toilet (always filthy!) and a steam generator unit if passenger equipped, or a big block of concrete in its place. (weight on that truck was important for traction.) We didn't like a GP30 on the head end because they were slippery. [funny story] An old conductor went back to the short nose to "take care of business" on a GP9; next thing he knew, the head brakeman was opening the doors of the short hood while going through Hyattsville in mid-afternoon. I asked him, "What did you do, Tommy?" Tom said, "Wasn't anything I could do but grin!"

[nfmisso]

The nose has nothing to do with the power.

Yard switchers generally have less horsepower, but as much tractive effort as a comparable road switcher. For instance a GP18 and SW1200, both have the same tractive effort, but the GP18 has 1800 horsepower vs the SW1200's 1200 hp. The SW1200 can start the same weight train as the GP18, but the GP will move it faster. Don't confuse power and force (tractive effort).

Nigel

[nfmisso]

Another example of horsepower vs tractive effort. The Union Pacific is/has converted several of thier SD40-2 for yard service. In the process, they removed the turbo's, reducing the horsepower from 3000 to 2000. This has no effective on the tractive effort.

THe N&W (now NS) uses slugs (converted from older diesel-electric locomotives, by removing the diesel, and adding wires to tap electrical power from the "mother") in yard service. In the '70's these were cut down FM TM coupled to modified Alco C630 locos. Often two slugs were mated with one mother. This lash up had a total of 3000hp, and in excess of 300,000lbs of tractive effort; a match for three 3600hp SD45 (10,800hp) locos.

Many other railroads used/use slugs, including Conrail, Southern, SP, UP, CSX,......

Nigel