Trains.com

Getting tanked.

5126 views
40 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    May 2015
  • 5,134 posts
Posted by ericsp on Friday, April 7, 2017 11:58 PM

Murphy Siding

     If there is a pipeline terminal 25 miles from the D&I homebase, would that suggest that it would be more cost efficient to ship it in by truck?

 

That would be my guess. Take a look at satellite photographs of the terminal. If there are no tank car loading facilities, it is probably almost guaranteed they get fuel by truck but there are almost always exceptions.

"No soup for you!" - Yev Kassem (from Seinfeld)

  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Friday, April 7, 2017 10:53 PM

     If there is a pipeline terminal 25 miles from the D&I homebase, would that suggest that it would be more cost efficient to ship it in by truck?

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    May 2015
  • 5,134 posts
Posted by ericsp on Friday, April 7, 2017 9:42 PM

Diesel fuel is combustible so I believe it does not need buffer cars. If they were carrying diesel fuel they should have been placarded 1202 or 1993.

Besides quantity of fuel used another factor is distance to the nearest pipeline terminal. Both UP and BNSF probably use more fuel around here than D&I but refuel their locomotives from trucks since the yards are close to a pipeline terminal.

"No soup for you!" - Yev Kassem (from Seinfeld)

  • Member since
    April 2007
  • From: Iowa
  • 3,293 posts
Posted by Semper Vaporo on Friday, April 7, 2017 4:20 PM

Aren't you supposed to say, "Yur Wlcome" after you get "Tanked"?  Mischief

Semper Vaporo

Pkgs.

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Southeast Michigan
  • 2,983 posts
Posted by Norm48327 on Friday, April 7, 2017 4:03 PM

Murphy Siding
Norm48327

Dang! I read the thread title and thought there was going to be a party in SD. Wink Devil

I said "What's your sign?"
She said "Aquarium."
I said "Me too! Let's get tanked!"

Somethin' sounds fishy there. Smile Or was Froggy Courtin'?

Norm


  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Friday, April 7, 2017 3:49 PM

Norm48327

Dang! I read the thread title and thought there was going to be a party in SD. Wink Devil

 



I said "What's your sign?"
She said "Aquarium."
I said "Me too! Let's get tanked!"


Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Friday, April 7, 2017 3:45 PM

 

I thought buffer cars were only required on units trains of flammable stuff?

 

It's certainly possible that the tank cars had something else in them. The only other tank car traffic further up the line would have been maybe fertilizer to either of the small elevators up the line. I just figured diesel fuel because that seemed like the only thing anybody would need in quantity up the line.

Thanks to Mac’s figures above, it looks like they use perhaps 40-50 carloads a year.  The fertilizer might be a carload a year to each elevator. Who knows, since there was 2 cars together, maybe that was this year’s shipment?

 

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Southeast Michigan
  • 2,983 posts
Posted by Norm48327 on Friday, April 7, 2017 3:37 PM

Dang! I read the thread title and thought there was going to be a party in SD. Wink Devil

Norm


  • Member since
    July 2010
  • From: Louisiana
  • 2,310 posts
Posted by Paul of Covington on Friday, April 7, 2017 3:17 PM

Murphy Siding
Right behind the 4 locomotives were 2 loaded tank cars. I deduced that they were probably hauling diesel fuel for the railroad.

    Maybe they were buffer cars to protect the locomotives from the rock cars.Whistling

    But seriously, shouldn't there be a buffer car between the locomotive and the tank cars?   Could they have been carrying something other than fuel?

_____________ 

  "A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner

  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: Allentown, PA
  • 9,810 posts
Posted by Paul_D_North_Jr on Friday, April 7, 2017 1:53 PM

Much more data is needed to provide a better estimate than Mac has above.

Aside from the distance you've provided, most important is about how long those locomotives are running in each throttle position.  That in turn depends mainly on the grade(s) and/or the rises and falls of the profile over that distance; curve resistance would also be a minor factor, as is the speed at each location.

Once those are known - Al Krug's calculator may be helpful ( http://hm.evilgeniustech.com/alkrug.vcn.com/rrfacts/RRForcesCalc.html ) - then you can start figuring throttle positions and fuel usage.  Again, Al has provided some useful webpages with good data for that: 

 For many models of locomotive: http://hm.evilgeniustech.com/alkrug.vcn.com/rrfacts/fueluse.htm 

 For SD40's specifically: http://hm.evilgeniustech.com/alkrug.vcn.com/rrfacts/fuelSD40.htm 

- PDN. 

"This Fascinating Railroad Business" (title of 1943 book by Robert Selph Henry of the AAR)
  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 2,593 posts
Posted by PNWRMNM on Friday, April 7, 2017 1:33 PM

Murphy,

This is VERY rough. May vary a bunch if average grade is ascending. I will assume average flat but actually rolling (undulating) grade.

Your 110 car train will weigh 14,450 tons assuming fully loaded nominal 100 ton cars, 263,000 gross weight on rail. That means your SD 40 is rated at not less than 7,250 tons, which implies maximum grade against the loads of about .5%, a nice line in terms of grade.

I will assume 25 MPH which is about 5 hours travel time. Add 1 hour to load, one to unload and one to run around and switch out bad order cars. Have 5 hours under heavy load, 5 hours light load, and 3 hours basically run 1. Somewhat arbitrarily I will assume 100 GPH per unit heavy load, 50 GPH light load and 25 GPH Run 1. Actual consumption rate as function of throttle is available but since the duty cycle is a guess, I did not bother to look it up.

With SD 40 per unit, we have 5x100, plus 5x50, plus 3x25 or 825 gallons per unit per trip. Two units 1,650 gallons per trip.

With Geeps you have smaller engines but more of them. Horsepower hours will be in same ballpark so assume 4 geeps have same fuel consumption as two SD 40s, another 1,650 gallons per trip, or 3,300 gallons per day.

It would take 7.5 working days to go through a 25,000 gallon tank car, or about 8 for a 28,000 gallon car. If the RR saves 10 cents per gallon that is $330 per day. That will buy about three new wood ties installed per work day.

Mac

  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Getting tanked.
Posted by Murphy Siding on Friday, April 7, 2017 11:18 AM

    Out walking last night I got to see an empty Dakota & Iowa Railroad train roll by. It was a unit train of empty rock cars heading home from Sioux City iowa to homebase at the quarry in Dell Rapids S.D. Right behind the 4 locomotives were 2 loaded tank cars. I deduced that they were probably hauling diesel fuel for the railroad.

      I presume that any good sized shortline railroad would consume enough diesel fuel to warrant shipping it in by rail. That makes sense. 

     On average, the D&I uses 4-5 old Geeps and SD-40s to haul 2 unit trains of rock about 110 miles out and empties back home every day. Adding in the work trains in the yard to put together trains and such, how much fuel could a railroad of that size go through in month? Any thoughts?

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

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