return of ''B'" UNITS ?

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

rdamon

I agree ..  wasn't that the basis of the UP CCRCLs

 

UP's CCRCL's and similar equipment on other roads were basically RCO receivers which were MU'ed to locomotives in switching service that were not equipped with their own receivers for RCO.

[Convicted One]

I believe there are photos floating around showing a Santa Fe A/B pairing of GP60s with the B unit in the lead...titled "long hood forward".

[Convicted One]

rdamon

wasn't that the basis of the UP CCRCLs

I'm afraid that you are over my head on that one, I don't have a qualified opinion to offer. 

[rdamon]

More like,  how much could we save if we eliminated ..

[Overmod]

BaltACD

I believe all 'independent' B units have rudimentary 'hostler controls' for handling the units in and around engine shops and servicing facilities.

In this case, 'did not' does mean 'did not'.  There are no hostling controls, either for throttle or brake, on a GP60B, and no sensible way to manipulate the 'automatics' manually (except via something plugged into MU).  See the pictures, and Krug's note that the units had to be towed or connected to be moved.

It can be an interesting exercise to consider what would have to be added to one of these units to implement hostling control, including the necessary safe vision.

Premise with these high-horsepower B-B units was that they would always operate in multiple consists, the same way TR units would never be operated as 'a plurality of switch engines'.  That's still characteristic of how they're operated today.  It would make sense to 'economize' on the overall order by eliminating the hostling controls entirely, although providing a simple portable or semi-portable MU-box control of the sort applied to some steam locomotives would seem to me to be a common-sense alternative for facilities that regularly shopped these units.

[BaltACD]

Convicted One

 

rdamon

According to Mr. Krug the GP60B did not have controls. 

I don't doubt that there was not an onboard control stand tailored  to human use. but there had to be onboard servos, or valves or linkages that controlled such things as throttle, or sanders, or brakes....operated via the MU

I believe all 'independent' B units have rudimentary 'hostler controls' for handling the units in and around engine shops and servicing facilities.  I personnaly saw 'hostler controls' in use on B&O F3's that were assigned to the Chicago Division between Willard and Chicago, when they being moved around the Roundhouse at Garrett in the late 1950's.

[rdamon]

I agree ..  wasn't that the basis of the UP CCRCLs

[Convicted One]

rdamon

According to Mr. Krug the GP60B did not have controls.

I don't doubt that there was not an onboard control stand tailored  to human use. but there had to be onboard servos, or valves or linkages that controlled such things as throttle, or sanders, or brakes....operated via the MU

 

[rdamon]

According to Mr. Krug the GP60B did not have controls.

http://krugtales.50megs.com/rrpictale/GP60/GP60b.htm

[Convicted One]

rdamon

Just make it RCO capable then you can use a belt pack to move it around..

 

 

I'm surprised that there isn't some kind of a "dongle" type device  that can be plugged into  the MU cables, perhaps with a bluetooth capability?

Since the "B" units were mu'ed, then local controls such as throttle, etc ....must already in place, requiring only an innerface, be it for a person(levers), or for a cyberlink(solid state).

[Overmod]

"L" is for 'lead' (the first cab in the locomotive consist as assembled);

"A" for the first unit behind lead -- note that for the ATSF PA sets, this was what we'd call a B unit...

"B" for the second unit behind lead -- note that for the ATSF PA sets this was what we'd call an A unit...

Remember that at this point in the 'history' ATSF was considering the three-unit consist as 'one locomotive', with the sublettering denoting how the units were arranged in the consist for maintenance, not operational purposes.  This meant you needed an unambiguous way of distinguishing cab ends of what was essentially a bidirectional consist, and the ATSF method certainly accomplished that with a minimum of confusion. 

Yes, for four-unit consists ATSF could use L-A-B-C

 

[MMLDelete]

"L" for "last?"

Seems like A-B-C would have been more logical and intuitive.

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

Adding to the above post, the unit designated as 310L would only display 310 on the unit itself.  The L suffix would only show up in assorted paperwork.

[SD70Dude]

Let's say we have a A-B-A set of F-units, the three unit set will be designated as, say, 310.  One A-unit is 310A, the B-unit is 310B, and the other A-unit is 310L.  Because they have only one number the A-B-A set is considered to be only one locomotive for the purposes of crew assignments.

[MMLDelete]

Overmod, could you please explain the L-A-B system?

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

rdamon

Just make it RCO capable then you can use a belt pack to move it around..

 

Not unlike NS 2120 and 2121.

 

http://www.nsdash9.com/rosters/2120.html

[rdamon]

Just make it RCO capable then you can use a belt pack to move it around..

[Overmod]

SD60MAC9500

Wasn't one of the motives for B-Units due to RR's circumventing unions on how many crew members should be in the cab of Diesels in road service?

It's a little more complicated. 

The original 'building block' idea according to Dilworth et al. came out of the limited horsepower per 'engine' for the early EMD V16s.  Part of the reason for the drawbar was that the two-unit "FT" was intended as a single locomotive, with a single road crew, with the overall consist weight used just as with steam locomotives to determine wage. 

Where the fun started to come in was when you had separate 'locomotives' MUed into a consist, and the unions tried the argument that there whould be a separate fireman on each of those ... not just one with the engineer on a locomotive with no fire to maintain ... just as there would have to be if you had MUed coal-fired steam.  KCS, as an example in point, had four-unit Erie-builts giving an 8000hp articulated locomotive, which only incidentally could be separated if one of its 'units' should require service.  To my knowledge there was never a requirement that more than one engineer was necessary on a locomotive of however many MUed units, but all sorts of dodges were used to number things so that you only had one "locomotive" -- the original ATSF L-A-B system being one relatively comical case in point.  In the very brief era where glass-reflector nose numbers were in vogue, you'd sometimes see the 'locomotive' number large on each of the cab noses, and only small versions  of the individual 'unit' subnumbering.

I believe we've discussed the exact chronology, and the decisions that led to the 'common-sense' (and more than a little safety-related) decision that only one engineer and fireman per consist were needed.  Perhaps needless to say, most of the multiple-units-with-the-same-road-number thing did not last long afterward. 

[SD60MAC9500]

 

Wasn't one of the motives for B-Units due to RR's circumventing union's on how many crew members should be in the cab of Diesels in road service? Imagine if EMC's FT was a twin section unit akin to what they have in Russia having a second cab instead of a drawbarred cabless booster?

 

[Overmod]

Backshop

I believe that was the Haysi Railroad, who serviced a mine on the Clinchfield.

Strange you should mention that thing.

http://clinchfieldcountry.com/photos/haysi/hasyicontrols.htm

Supposedly ex-B&LE 716B has a similar arrangement (but with a window, not a porthole) -- enlarge this picture and see:

http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=3530297

 

[Backshop]

samfp1943

 

And I think. I also  also remember a STORY(?) REFERENCING HOW THE CLINCHFIELD(?) utilized one of its "B" in a regular job of switching at a custiomer's mine load out(?)

I believe that was the Haysi Railroad, who serviced a mine on the Clinchfield.

[Overmod]

Convicted One

... looks as though there is ample room for computer interfaces:

http://krugtales.50megs.com/rrpictale/GP60/GP60b.htm

He's right, you know.  NASA was flying F18s using only vision screens over a decade ago.  Plenty of room for screens, or an AR headset, and of course an adaptation of DPU in a handheld device for control.

And, of course, all the room in the world for a PTC-aware autonomous control setup...

There'll be lots of these around for some time to come, I suspect.  They're running solid 5-booster blocks of them in the Pacific Northwest.

[Convicted One]

SD70Dude

But there are no windows, making it difficult for a human operator to take over even if there was a full set of controls in there. 

Well, they've got 25 years to work those kinks out...lol!

[SD70Dude]

But there are no windows, making it difficult for a human operator to take over even if there was a full set of controls in there. 

[Convicted One]

And this article includes pictures of the "B" units control area, looks as though there is ample room for computer innerfaces:

http://krugtales.50megs.com/rrpictale/GP60/GP60b.htm

[SD70Dude]

I believe hostler controls on B-units were optional, though it seems that many (most?) railroads did order them.

Later B-units, like the GP60B, did not come with hostler controls:

http://krugtales.50megs.com/rrpictale/GP60/GP60b.htm

[samfp1943]

Convicted One

SD70Dude

and at least some rudimentary controls to move it around if the autopilot "crashes".

 Didn't the "B" units we are already familiar with have hostling controls that would allow an operator to move them around?

Reaching back to a Forum from 2009 see linked @

http://cs.trains.com/trn/f/111/t/153565.aspx

and then stepping back to May 2006 a piece by Robert  S. McGonigal, titled :

"Booster units" "Dieseldom's foot soldiers" from the series ABC's of Railroading.

aee linked @ https://trn.trains.com/railroads/abcs-of-railroading/2006/05/booster-units

And I think. I also  also remember a STORY(?) REFERENCING HOW THE CLINCHFIELD(?) utilized one of its "B" in a regular job of switching at a custiomer's mine load out(?)

So the answer is a Positive for most of the various "B" Units having a rudamentary set of hostler controls on board.

[Convicted One]

SD70Dude

and at least some rudimentary controls to move it around if the autopilot "crashes".

Didn't the "B" units we are already familiar with have hostling controls that would allow an operator to move them around?

[SD70Dude]

Convicted One

tomytuna

.why hasent a mfgr come out to make a "B" unit again. no neeed for "cumfort".

I predict that in another 25 years, they all will be "B" units.

Still gonna need a cab for all the computer interfaces, and at least some rudimentary controls to move it around if the autopilot "crashes".

[Convicted One]

tomytuna

.why hasent a mfgr come out to make a "B" unit again. no neeed for "cumfort".

I predict that in another 25 years, they all will be "B" units.