By by SD90MAC H2's.

[Anonymous]

Now that the UP is gona getting rid of the SD90MAC's Is the UP gona be filling that very large number gap when all of the SD90's are all but gone? Because the new SD70ACe's are starting to fill that gap now more than ever. Who is the UP gona sell of the SD90MAC H2's too? So get your Photo's now because there are gona be none on the UP system left.

[eolafan]

U.P. getting rid of the SD90MAC units? They are still very young and full of lots of life...who will buy them...just can't believe they will scrap them![:(]

[Gluefinger]

UP is getting rid of the 90MACS? Where did you hear this?

[Anonymous]

UP will not scrap the SD90MAC's. When their lessor period ends they are going to send them back to EMD. I got my info from a chat site.
BNSFrailfan.

[oskar]

[:O] HOLY CRAP!!!!!!!!!!!




kevin

[Gluefinger]

Oh wow, just read this on loco notes too.....they sure didn't last long!

[DPD1]

Seems like the railroads have kind of reached a size limit that they don't want to surpass. If you think about it, other diesels that stepped over that size in the past, weren't very successful either. The 70 series is very flexible.

Dave
-DPD Productions - Featuring the NEW TrainTenna LP Directional RR Radio Monitoring Antenna-
http://eje.railfan.net/dpdp/

[nanaimo73]

When is the lease period up on UP ? Since their SD9043s were designed to have the interm engine replaced with the big one when available, can't they just do the reverse on these and make them SD9043s ?

[Anonymous]

Anybody else expect that the same thing will happen to the CP 90MACs as well. They rarely stray from the Winnipeg-Thunder Bay trains so that they don't get to far from the shops in Winnipeg.

[Overmod]

What I'd like to know (too lazy to go see if I can find out for myself right now) is whether UP is planning on ditching the 9043s as well as the units refitted with the 265 H. That would indicate whether it's an engine issue or something else, like length or uncommon design.

I would assume that the cost of re-engining (or perhaps "un-re-engining' would be a better term) isn't cost-effective when the numbers get run, vs. terminating the lease, letting EMD do the work, and then re-leasing the fixed units de novo. Cost accounting for railroads can be an interesting thing!

One thing I would NOT expect is that the locomotives will be scrapped, although I do wonder whether their size is required if producing 'only' 4000-odd hp. I'm also interested in seeing what happens to the ex-Conrail SD80MACs, which are effectively both white elephants and orphans under their current operators, and will almost certainly be 'ditched' as soon as lease economics permits...

[Overmod]

Mysterious ghost duplicate post is hereby deleted. Not quite sure what caused it this time.

[nanaimo73]

How many H engines are out there ? CP has 4 I believe, and 61 SD9043s.
CP, EMD, UP and CSX, they are the only ones ?

[Anonymous]

CSX doesn't have any units with 265H's in them.

[BNSFGP38]

A few years ago in the Trains power desk section of the magazine, someone predicted that the SD-90 was it. There prediction panned out.

Ladies and gentleman, you have just seen the most powerful diesel ever made. From now on, my prediction at least is you will see emissions and fuel consumption be the target, not horsepower.

[DPD1]

QUOTE: Originally posted by BNSFGP38

A few years ago in the Trains power desk section of the magazine, someone predicted that the SD-90 was it. There prediction panned out.

Ladies and gentleman, you have just seen the most powerful diesel ever made. From now on, my prediction at least is you will see emissions and fuel consumption be the target, not horsepower.

Yeah, I wouldn't be surprised... Although, I wouldn't underestimate the ability for history to repeat itself. A younger generation of executives could show up 20 years from now, and get sold on the whole 'bigger is better' mentality all over again... "Just think sir, how much money you will save running trains with two units, that use to take three or four". What a great idea!

Dave
-DPD Productions - Featuring the NEW TrainTenna LP Directional RR Radio Monitoring Antenna-
http://eje.railfan.net/dpdp/

[Anonymous]

I think that the Railroads should go back to the Steam Locomotives so just to shut up those stupid retarded EPA guys. I mean hell if the EPA want's to cry all the time about Gas emissions I think that they should bring back the goll darn Steam Engine. And I speak the D*mn truth too.
BNSFrailfan.

[CSXrules4eva]

QUOTE: Originally posted by eolafan

U.P. getting rid of the SD90MAC units? They are still very young and full of lots of life...who will buy them...just can't believe they will scrap them![:(]

HAY WAIT A MINUTE UP BETTER NOT SCRAP THE SD90MAC HII's if they do, Up will have to put up with sever mouth from me.!! As you said eolafan the SD90MAC H IIs are still very young why would UP give them up?? The only other railroad I know of that has SD90MAC H II's is CP. I can't imagine UP selling them to CP. However, if they don't want them mabe the should give one to me. :):):)

[CSXrules4eva]

QUOTE: Originally posted by cnw8835

CSX doesn't have any units with 265H's in them.

Maybe CSX should start thinking about getting some.[:D][:D]

[Anonymous]

My friend just told me last night that the UP in not going to get rid of the SD90MAC H's. There going to Renumber them.

[nanaimo73]

Should we start this thread over again ?[:)]

[BNSFGP38]

See, the SD-90 were the victim of what I call the just enough/ over kill paradox.

You build a locomotive that by its self can handle a long train. Great, this super duper 6000 hp loco can haul this100 car train its self, but gee---what it if break s down.

Better send another 6000 hp super unit with it, cause I dont want to tie up 3 other smaller locomotives and a 6000hp unit is all I got that will haul the 100 car train+ a dead super unit with minimal units. But now, my train doesnt break down so now I have 12,000 HP on a train that only needs 5500 hp. Thats a waste of power, waste of fuel.
[8]

Super unit diesels were the forgotten lesson from steam locomotive history ---that bigger is not always better. Also building these super units took away one advantage diesels had over steam. Building up HP in building block sizes. That way you got the power you need, but the waste is not that great. Just like adding an extra B unit or GP-9 to a train.

But that also comes with a paradox, how many small units do you need to keep around before you are wasteing fuel and money also with loco's doing nothing? The answer is really a mid range compromise, like the SD-40 and GP-40/38's. They had power needed, but were not a waste. Same with todays version of the SD-40...........the SD-70.


There is a practical limit to HP if you dont want your loco collpasing bridges and breaking rails. Remember, super units= limited or speical service. Notice 2-8-0's, 4-6-2's were more sucessfull and populus than big boys and 0-4-0's?

No different with SD 90's today. Super unit= limited use.

[espeefoamer]

I have heard that UP will get rid of the 90 MACs with the H engines,and keep the 90/43s.

[Anonymous]

Note, that SD-40 and SD-70 have similar Power/Tractive Effort values (about 0,033). From operational POV sd-70 is just unit reduction for sd-40.

6000 hp loco would be feasible if it operationally had the same value of te as two sd-40 or about 180000 lb. Frankly - I don't see that happening with 6 axles.

[Gluefinger]

They are renumbering 22 locos that have a different lease agreement, and returning the rest to EMD.

SD9043s are safe (for now)

:: Addition ::

This is from Sean Graham-White on Loconotes

>UP 8500-8521 move to 8910-8931, with 8514 already re# to 8924 on
>5/3/05. The remainder of the SD90ACs do not get renumbered.
>
>Sean

[Anonymous]

The other units are UP 8522-8561. Their lease is expected to expire in December of 2006 it appears and should be returned sometime around then.

Source for this is Utah Rails on trainweb.org whose source within the Jenks Shop in Little Rock prefers to stay anonymous.

[Anonymous]

There we go......I thank you all for the PROPER infomation! Thank you!
BNSFrailfan.

[oltmannd]

The problem with the SD90MACs isn't the amount of HP, it's that lousy EMD H engine!

A 6000 HP AC locomotive is good, all around replacement for SD60/70s or C40s on a 2 for 3 basis. A pair of 6000 HP ACs will pull just about any intermodal or gen'l merchandise train their is.

[Randy Stahl]

QUOTE: Originally posted by CSXrules4eva

QUOTE: Originally posted by eolafan

U.P. getting rid of the SD90MAC units? They are still very young and full of lots of life...who will buy them...just can't believe they will scrap them![:(]

HAY WAIT A MINUTE UP BETTER NOT SCRAP THE SD90MAC HII's if they do, Up will have to put up with sever mouth from me.!! As you said eolafan the SD90MAC H IIs are still very young why would UP give them up?? The only other railroad I know of that has SD90MAC H II's is CP. I can't imagine UP selling them to CP. However, if they don't want them mabe the should give one to me. :):):)

Trust me Sara, you don't want one. Unless you have a warehouse full of very expensive parts your chances of keeping one running are slim. These engines spent the bulk of thier lives at VMV Paducha having mod after mod done to them. All this extra work was at EMD expense and may have been responsible for EMD's demise. EMD LOST alot of $$$$ on these engines. No thanks, I'll take a GP-40.
Randy

[Anonymous]

That might explain why every time I see a set of SD90MAC H2's with a very short Train.
Sounds like the SD90's are very weak Power.

[Anonymous]

These and GE's hi-tech designs never really had a chance from the start.
The Class 1's need standardized, flexible, reliable motive power.
These designs wound up being oddballs, when they were supposed to change the face of heavy haul mainline railroading.
It's just another case of history repeating itself. It's funny how many times the railroads have had to relearn this lesson.
Roads like NS and CN never bit ( even BNSF went no farther than SD-70 MAC"S) . They probably knew something, and their " no thanks" attitude likely helped bring them down.
Jimmy