I saw this article by Carl Swanson yesterday:
https://www.trains.com/trn/railroads/locomotives/alaska-railroads-sd70macs/
which contains this statement "its computer-controlled HTC-R “steerable” trucks glide around the line’s many tight curves".
There is nothing computer-controlled about the HTCR truck, it simple steers itself in response to the creep forces generated at the wheel-rail interface. No idea where the author got this idea. He uses the term "steerable", which is the term used by GE to describe their radial steering truck which EMD has never used; we called it a "self-steering radial" truck.
I hate to think that railfans and ChatGTP would now use this poorly researched article as authoritative reference material. But it must be true if it is on the internet.
Dave
bogie_engineer I saw this article by Carl Swanson yesterday: https://www.trains.com/trn/railroads/locomotives/alaska-railroads-sd70macs/ which contains this statement "its computer-controlled HTC-R “steerable” trucks glide around the line’s many tight curves". There is nothing computer-controlled about the HTCR truck, it simple steers itself in response to the creep forces generated at the wheel-rail interface. No idea where the author got this idea. He uses the term "steerable", which is the term used by GE to describe their radial steering truck which EMD has never used; we called it a "self-steering radial" truck. "...I hate to think that railfans and ChatGTP would now use this poorly researched article as authoritative reference material. But it must be true if it is on the internet..." Dave
"...I hate to think that railfans and ChatGTP would now use this poorly researched article as authoritative reference material. But it must be true if it is on the internet..."
Unfortunately,DAVE, you are really on to something......In today's society;the old 'saw": That says; "...TRUTH is just getting its pants on, while Internet lies, are half-way around the world..." seems a real truism.
I seem to recall seeing exactly that 'defined problem'; you've described, show up in more than one published piece,and seemimgly, confused comments after those published pieces.
The September issue of Trains has an article on the ARR. On page 25 they have a photo of the "704-foot Mears Memorial Bridge spanning the Yukon River." It actually crosses the Tanana River.
It's since been fixed, but the news article about the retrucking of the Mark Twain Zephyr referred to the EMD switcher donor as a "SW-600".
While the pages of Trains was once a sea of inconsistency with diesel designations back in the 1960's and earlier (even in EMD's own ads of the era), this was the first misstep like this that I can recall in many decades for an as-built locomotive with a factory applied model designation.
What's wrong with that, the hyphen?
Everything authoritative I have seen, including a post at RyPN from one of the people doing the work, indicates that the engine donor for the MTZ is indeed one of the 15 SW600s. (They wanted a C-block 6-567).
They do have four SW1s, but that is circumstantial.
The generally accepted form for EMD model designations in modern times is to not have a hyphen after the model family. Hence why you wrote SW1 rather than SW-1.
For instance in the pages of Trains Magazine, the last time SW was followed by a hypen (not counting line breaks) was the April 1969 issue in the article 'When it's shortline time down South' by Jim Boyd, with the appearance of SW-1500 in the first sentence.
Correct or not (EMD themselves flip flopped regularly back then and Jim Boyd was an EMD field instructor), Kalmbach sought consistency in model desiginations and SD, NW, SW, GP, F, E, and so on have never been followed by a hypen in the pages of Trains since ~1970 and the railfan world has generally tagged along with such standardization.
Hopefully a one-off mistake, but perhaps further evidence of a decline in quality for a publisher that has traditionally kept mistakes, outside of perhaps maps where they have a checkered history, to a minimum.
There was a period in the late 1960s or early 1970s when EMD used a "forward slash" or "/" as in SD/39 and SD/45. This was fairly short lived, but did appear in "Trains".
I myself think that some break might be useful in the more complex model numbers, such as GT46C ACe. I've added a space after the first "C", since GT46C is a separate class of its own, with DC traction, and makes it clear that the "AC" indicates AC traction and the "e" indicates a modification in the type of power electronics.
Peter
Despite holding Kalmbach to a higher standard, I do this myself from time to time, especially with Fairbanks-Morse power. H-24-66 looks just as correct to my eyes as H24-66 does for an example and I'm sure there's no consistency with what form I personally use such as at this forum.
I'm not even sure which format is considered the most proper. Wikipedia goes with the extra hypen format for what little that's worth, but Trains traditionally seems to prefer the latter form with the single hypen between the horsepower rating and the axle/traction motor count (although the dual hypen format does make occasional appearances in Kalmbach publications, including in modern issues of Trains).
Leo_Ames The generally accepted form for EMD model designations in modern times is to not have a hyphen after the model family. Hence why you wrote SW1 rather than SW-1. For instance in the pages of Trains Magazine, the last time SW was followed by a hypen (not counting line breaks) was the April 1969 issue in the article 'When it's shortline time down South' by Jim Boyd, with the appearance of SW-1500 in the first sentence. Correct or not (EMD themselves flip flopped regularly back then and Jim Boyd was an EMD field instructor), Kalmbach sought consistency in model desiginations and SD, NW, SW, GP, F, E, and so on have never been followed by a hypen in the pages of Trains since ~1970 and the railfan world has generally tagged along with such standardization. Hopefully a one-off mistake, but perhaps further evidence of a decline in quality for a publisher that has traditionally kept mistakes, outside of perhaps maps where they have a checkered history, to a minimum.
Now you tell me. I never got the memo. I've sometimes used the hyphen, sometimes not, usually for the dash 2 designations. But when not using the hyphen I usually leave a space between the SD or GP and the model number. I don't think I'll change.
The next thing you'll tell me is that Pluto isn't a planet.
Jeff
jeffhergert The next thing you'll tell me is that Pluto isn't a planet. Jeff
Actually, it still is considered a planet, but it's a minor planet, falling somewhere between the eight known major planets and the asteroids.
Maybe we could call Pluto a planette?
This thread has gone through an interesting evolution. It started out about a misrepresentation about the EMD radial truck, mentioned a misplaced bridge, became an extended discussion about the use of the hyphen, then on to the planets.
_____________
"A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner
We're just killing time until Carl Swanson, who I see posting in another thread, comes on and tells us his sources for the computer-controlled truck action.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.