Well, the worst, pitiful paint job anyway. Can't hardly get any worse than this. This former ATSF C40-8W, BNSF 832, isn't fairing well appearance-wise.
I have seen some ex-Santa Fe units looking pretty bad....not sure if this is the same one that I have seen before... Wow, what a mess..
BNSFs 9647 "the barf bonnit" has been by on a few coal trains here in nw ohio.
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").
eolafan wrote:Not to make excuses for the appearance of this particular unit, but I'll bet it's paid for and hey, it runs and can pull revenue merchandise loads...so hey, what the heck!
Actually, I didn't mean to sound like I was complaining. I agree with you, and it was a treat to see the old Frisco colors hanging on. I couldn't get off the highway to take a better look, and didn't have my camera with me. ( I don't photograph much anymore anyway).
Hey! I've got a shot of that one. Come to think of it, I remember thinking that it had to be the saddest looking loco on the BNSF, too! Truly a shame that a warbonnet ever got this bad:
-ChrisWest Chicago, ILChristopher May Fine Art Photography"In wisdom gathered over time I have found that every experience is a form of exploration." ~Ansel Adams
saw 2 of the green ones in walbrige(toledo) yesterday.yes they do need new paint.
Joe
THE SANTA FE WOULD OF NEVER LET THERE LOCOS LOOK LIKE THAT,WHAT A SHAME FOR SUCH A PROUD HERITAGE. LONG LIVE CHICO!!!
I think BNSF #4437 comes pretty close to being the worst looking.
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=195287&nseq=0
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=137633&nseq=1
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=61698&nseq=2
At least #832 has some character. #4437 looks just plain disgusting.
CSXfan,
On the last picture of #4437 on the Needles Sub. For a split second it kind of looked like a dirty UP unit. But still WOW !!! What a contrast of #4437 and the other Heritage II paint schemes locos in the consists!
Who did BNSF had painted #4437 ???? Earl Schrieb!?!?!?!?!?
Mechanical Department "No no that's fine shove that 20 pound set all around the yard... those shoes aren't hell and a half to change..."
The Missabe Road: Safety First
There is one that comes through Flagstaff about every two days that is way way worse, I think it is on the Phoenix run. It has been on fire, the paint, which very little is left is all burned off in the center of the engine which is now a rust color and there is graffiti everywhere on top of that. I will try to get a picture to post.
elrojo
sarahd wrote: THE SANTA FE WOULD OF NEVER LET THERE LOCOS LOOK LIKE THAT,WHAT A SHAME FOR SUCH A PROUD HERITAGE. LONG LIVE CHICO!!!
I have a couple of photos of Santa Fe GP30 #2742 among my collection. It was in the gold and blue warbonnet scheme. They were taken in Crystal City, MO shortly after the merger. I thought it was a treat to see ATSF in old Frisco territory.
But how that relates to this subject is that this locomotive is so clean and shiny it looked like it just came out of the paint shop, or like a new Athearn model. Yes, long live Chico.
CSXFan wrote: I think BNSF #4437 comes pretty close to being the worst looking. At least #832 has some character. #4437 looks just plain disgusting.
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
CSXFan wrote:I think BNSF #4437 comes pretty close to being the worst looking. http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=195287&nseq=0http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=137633&nseq=1http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=61698&nseq=2 At least #832 has some character. #4437 looks just plain disgusting.
Rotten Pumpkin
I remembered seeing a very faded SF unit in Galesburg a couple of years back- looked through my pictures hoping it was 832, but no-
Brian (IA) http://blhanel.rrpicturearchives.net.
Ive also shot that 832, gross for sure. BUT, this one here, the 838, seems much worse.
Alec
Duct tape does wonders.....
The Santa Fe had a color chart to measure when a locomotive had to be repainted. If the fading got pass a certain point, it was sent to the paint booth. Yes, the 832 and 838 would have NEVER got this bad back then.
Take care,
Russell
Trainnut484 wrote: sarahd wrote: THE SANTA FE WOULD OF NEVER LET THERE LOCOS LOOK LIKE THAT,WHAT A SHAME FOR SUCH A PROUD HERITAGE. LONG LIVE CHICO!!!The Santa Fe had a color chart to measure when a locomotive had to be repainted. If the fading got pass a certain point, it was sent to the paint booth. Yes, the 832 and 838 would have NEVER got this bad back then.Take care,Russell
True,
...Except when they pulled the rustbucket U33C's and U23C's (*8500's and 7500's) out of the stored lines (LUGO-Argentine) to run for a few weeks in the eighties just to prove to the lessor that they were servicable before turning them in to Greyhound Leasing. [the lease was up, they were still crap]....some rusted so badly that you could not read the yellow "Santa Fe" on the long blue hood hood when they wobbled into/out of La Junta on a 304/403 train.
So I'm curious...
Did GE use different paint than EMD did? I was looking through some shots last night, and I came across this Geep 60 that I shot only a few months before the shot of 832:
I would have thought that on something like the warbonnet units, the Santa Fe would have spec'd a paint manufacturer that both builders would have used. Were GE and EMD free to use who they wanted as long as the color matched?
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.