Trains.com

If BNSF retires early SD70MACs, #9400 and #9647 should be donated to museums

7729 views
15 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    September 2005
  • 965 posts
If BNSF retires early SD70MACs, #9400 and #9647 should be donated to museums
Posted by Lyon_Wonder on Sunday, September 12, 2010 10:09 PM

As we all know BNSF has mothballed #9600 and leased some former BN SD70MACs to Mexico on a short-term basis.  The former BN #9400-9710 SD70MACs are now 15-16 years old.  IMO, if BNSF retires these early SD70MACs at least 2 of these should be donated to rail museums considering their historical value as early AC-traction freight locos.  BNSF #9400/BN #9400 was the first SD70MAC delivered to BN in late 1993. Other than the prototype SD60MACs, #9400 was also the first production AC-traction loco in revenue freight service.  Of course #9400 was repainted into H2 and would have to painted back into BN cream and green to give it’s original newly-delivered appearance. 

http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/locoPicture.aspx?id=74950


BNSF #9647 was painted in an experimental paint scheme at the onset of the BN-ATSF merger that combined ATSF’s warbonnet with the BN SD70MAC’s “Grinstein” cream and green.  Though known universally by railfans as the “vomitbonnet”, BNSF #9647 is worth preserving in it’s vomitbonnet paint scheme.

http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/locoPicture.aspx?id=3979

IMO, IRM would be a good place to donate at least one of these SD70MACs considering their already diverse collection of CB&Q, BN and C&NW locos.

  • Member since
    May 2004
  • From: Mason City, Iowa
  • 901 posts
Posted by RRKen on Sunday, September 12, 2010 10:15 PM

How about making a profit, and selling them to Mexico.  Profit is good.  Donating them is a waste of reasources. 

I never drink water. I'm afraid it will become habit-forming.
W. C. Fields
I never met a Moderator I liked
  • Member since
    September 2013
  • 2,505 posts
Posted by caldreamer on Monday, September 13, 2010 9:28 AM

By donating the units, BNSF can write off the FULL retail value of the engines.  They would  get less by selling them.  15 percent of $4,000,000 is $600,000, which can be deducted from their profits.  I do not think they wouel get that much in cash for them from the mixican railroads.

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Monday, September 13, 2010 10:06 AM

igoldberg

By donating the units, BNSF can write off the FULL retail value of the engines.  They would  get less by selling them.  15 percent of $4,000,000 is $600,000, which can be deducted from their profits.  I do not think they wouel get that much in cash for them from the mixican railroads.

I'm not an accountant but I think that the writeoff (which generates no income) would be on their fully depreciated value.  A sale would probably be for more than that figure and would also generate some income.

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    January 2005
  • From: Duluth,Minnesota,USA
  • 4,015 posts
Posted by coborn35 on Monday, September 13, 2010 10:37 AM

RRKen

How about making a profit, and selling them to Mexico.  Profit is good.  Donating them is a waste of reasources. 

Well thats a very cynical view on things. It would be easier and more profitable to run diesel trips as opposed to steam engines too...

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

 

  • Member since
    January 2002
  • From: Canterlot
  • 9,575 posts
Posted by zugmann on Monday, September 13, 2010 10:53 AM

I'd rather see the engines earning their keep in Mexico or South America than rusting away in a museum backlot.  How many museums are capable of maintaining these engines in running order?

 

Yes, it would be easier to run diesel trips (and many do).  But some railroads believe that a steam engine has a PR value unmatched by diesels.

 

 

It's been fun.  But it isn't much fun anymore.   Signing off for now. 


  

The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any

  • Member since
    January 2005
  • From: Duluth,Minnesota,USA
  • 4,015 posts
Posted by coborn35 on Monday, September 13, 2010 11:39 AM

So it would kill you to not see every single SD70MAC out there running the rails as opposed to having one or two in a museum?

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

 

  • Member since
    January 2002
  • From: Canterlot
  • 9,575 posts
Posted by zugmann on Monday, September 13, 2010 11:51 AM

coborn35

So it would kill you to not see every single SD70MAC out there running the rails as opposed to having one or two in a museum?

 

No.  But if it was a choice of selling one to Mexico, and donating one to a museum (with all things being equal), then yeah, send her down south.   A machine is built to be used.  That's the beauty of it.

 

I work in a yard with some heavy shifting on a hill.  The sound of a few GP38s and SD40-2s on their knees struggling to pull a draft of cars will ALWAYS beat seeing them sitting quiet on some museum track.

 

Then there's the finances. Have to do what makes the most sen$e.  If BNSF wants to donate them (or all of them) more power to them.  I just question the word choice of "should".   OP says they should be donated, I say they should be put to work.  A difference of opinion, that's all.

It's been fun.  But it isn't much fun anymore.   Signing off for now. 


  

The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any

  • Member since
    September 2013
  • 2,505 posts
Posted by caldreamer on Monday, September 13, 2010 2:17 PM

You may be right about the depreciated valu, not the full retail value.  I think BNSF will look to get the best deal, either the money for the engines or the tax write off.  Those guys are pretty business savy.

  • Member since
    December 2006
  • 1,879 posts
Posted by YoHo1975 on Monday, September 13, 2010 4:20 PM

Does BNSF even own any of the MACs or are they all Leased?

  • Member since
    May 2007
  • 201 posts
Posted by EMD#1 on Tuesday, September 14, 2010 8:02 AM

SD70MACs are not that old...When they hit 40 then you could think about putting one in a museum.  Right now they are too valuable to give away.  I don't see them being sold either.  BNSF is just making money while they have a surplus of engines.  As the ecomomy improves the engines will be needed again and they will be called back in service on the BNSF.  I'm not sure if they are under lease but if they are more than likely the lease is for 20 to 25 years.  This would only make sense to earn some money on them rather than put them in storage when they would be paying for them on a monthly basis anyway.  At the end of the lease then BNSF would be given the option to purchase them outright or turn them back in.

If these units are owned by a bank then the question whether to put these two units in a museum is not one that BNSF could decide and I don't see a bank donating any engine to a museum.

 

  • Member since
    December 2006
  • 1,879 posts
Posted by YoHo1975 on Tuesday, September 14, 2010 12:15 PM

I've heard form shop people that the MACs have not been well maintained.

Also, well maintained or not, they're going to require a CFR1033 part next time they go in for rebuild. 

  • Member since
    January 2002
  • 33 posts
Posted by sd24b on Tuesday, September 14, 2010 2:54 PM

If IRM did get the 9400 you could redo the photo line up with the BN1 and 2

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Vicksburg, Michigan
  • 2,303 posts
Posted by Andrew Falconer on Wednesday, September 15, 2010 3:45 AM

Some Museums could actually operate the SD70MACs on a schedule.

 

Andrew

Andrew

Watch my videos on-line at https://www.youtube.com/user/AndrewNeilFalconer

  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Wednesday, September 15, 2010 7:27 AM

I think you make a good case for saving the 9400.  Whether now or later, it ought to go somewhere safe after retirement.

 

Not so sure the vomit-bonnet needs saved.  Saving a locomotive because of a paint scheme seems to me a rather weak reason.  

-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    January 2005
  • From: Duluth,Minnesota,USA
  • 4,015 posts
Posted by coborn35 on Wednesday, September 15, 2010 8:55 AM

We would use the SD70MAC if we got one. We run coal trains every winter and although nothing beats an consist of mixed and matched F9, SD-18, SD-M and GP30, the GP30 and F-9 aren't getting any younger.

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

 

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy