New Locomotive for FGLK

Very true Luther, Thank you for your explination. I really have no statement to back up my claims at all. If anything, when FGLK goes to sell those GP9s, I totally want 1751 to go into preservation/private hands. Thats my favorite FGLK locomotive.
I do surely recognise the difference in engine blocks, 2 cycle vs. 4 cycle, and how GM had to kill their Detriot Diesel division since it couldn't easily compete with the other 4 cycles on the market. Given that some 2 cycles sound pretty sweet, the 645 for example, it just doesn't justify the use for the cost needed i guess, to eat my own words so to speak. A Big GP on the FGLK would be nice, but its feasibility is impractical for FGLK's use. If anything, When's Mr. Smith going to invest in some "Bigger" GEs? I think a B40-8 in FGLK would look pretty sweet, to be honest.

From the right seat point of view. Very few engineers I know like GE's. The older models lagged terribly with throttle response, and most were heavy smokers. Even the newer C40 and cw40's still have alot of lag time between throttle and actaul load increasing. It's just something we get used to and adjust for while we're running. The shortlines have less a concern for that issue since most of the time their operating at lower speeds and/or switching. Again they adjust to what their equipment does. GE's are popular with most shortlines now as there is a large surplus ,prices are cheap, parts plentiful, and their good on fuel consumption. CSX is in the process of retiring their remaining B30-7's and B36-7's. Imagine a couple of those monsters roaming around FingerLakes railway.

Luther Brefo wrote:Sean. As a friend, quit while you're behind.

Railroaders will always complain about whatever power the company buys. This complaining will get louder when they have an ear willing to listen and hang on to their every word. In this case, you were that ear.

Here's a bit of insight, a locomotive is a locomotive is a locomotive (some of the time). Of course some are better than others in some aspects and still other types excel in other fields. Could it be that the shop is tooled, equipped and capable of handling the GE's better at this point in time than they could the EMDs.

<snipped>

This is a great post, Luther. Let me add that I spoke to an FGLK employee back in 1997 and the RR was actively looking for additional locomotives because the Geeps were not sufficient for their needs. Enter the GEs and which have grown into a pretty nice fleet. At the same time, FGLK has sold off a couple of Geeps. That speaks volumes to me about what FGLK prefers. I also recall the FGLK article in Trains a few years ago... which stated FGLK tended to keep GEs in outlying areas (e.g. Himrod and Auburn) while keeping the remaining Geeps closer to Geneva.

Small businesses, unlike their larger counterparts, tend to be more responsive to the concerns of their employees... so I have no doubt Mike Smith is listening to his CMO and train crews about engine performance. Choosing GEs over EMDs is not a whim. It is a practical concern, as you (Luther) note, based on the railroad's needs.

Seems to me the Mountain Laurel engine left because of electrical gremlins, while the original three GPs they started with they didn't actually own, but leased from one of their parent companies (they were Farmrail sourced if I remember right).

When I mentioned are there any pictures , I was referring to current pictures. Ones that show the locomotive actually on the FINGER LAKES RAILWAY

Of course, let's not forget railroads are in the business of running freight trains to make a profit, and not to appease the railfan community's desire for a fleet of classic 1st generation locomotives of every shape, size and color.

Mr.S wrote:When I mentioned are there any pictures , I was referring to current pictures. Ones that show the locomotive actually on the FINGER LAKES RAILWAY

considering it hasnt arrived yet..no, there are no pictures.

Scot

I doubt you'll see 4000 HP 4-axle units appear on Finger Lakes. Conrail once tried replacing two 2300-HP B23s with one 3600-HP B36-7 and the crews I talked to deemed it a failure, the single unit was a lot more slippery than the pair of lower HP units. Same deal for GP40s compared to GP38s, but they also add turbo lag as an issue. Pretty much lower horsepower units are going to be the most versatile for a shortline where they don't run trains at high speeds - any unit can be used to switch on any job, and if they need to run a long train, just add more units on.

About a week ago the 2309 was reported to be at the interchange at Mingo Jct. OH

Lehighton_Man wrote:I totally want 1751 to go into preservation/private hands. Thats my favorite FGLK locomotive.

One day, I watched the operations and interchange between Ontario Central and FLRR. 1751, If I recall correctly - it usually went to canandiagua often- stalled on the hill with FEW cars west of shortville while BRP waiting for them to come up. They asked BRP for help. He was nicely lending his hand and got his alco coupled to these cars and put in throttle 2. They easily pulled these cars off the hill... He was laughing about what his baby can do while EMD cant.... what's the chance of this being their reason for buying GE... :x

maybe BRP can chime in about this...

4 cycle 251C vs. 2 cycle 567B.
Thus why I love alcos. 418 was a hauler. She never quit.
also, forgive me if I am incorrect, but I believe that hill is a 1.85% up.. That's quite steep for the lone GP9, who has seen 50+ years of service. Given that alco is equally old, there still is the power and reactive effort difference.

Has anyone here ever consider how the Finger Lakes Railway would look with ALCO's / MLW's instead of GE's and EMD's?

Mr.S wrote:Has anyone here ever consider how the Finger Lakes Railway would look with ALCO's / MLW's instead of GE's and EMD's?

Not much different than it looks now? What's your point?

Mr.S wrote:Has anyone here ever consider how the Finger Lakes Railway would look with ALCO's / MLW's instead of GE's and EMD's?

Think of BRP's toys and visualize their yellow stripes and lettering into white....

I spoke with an engineer early on in Finger Lakes operations who'd worked on OMID and he even said the Alcos were better pullers.