I don't know why people even post in the thread if they're not going to read.
Train Detainer wrote:The Ford museum unit was prepped for rail shipment, including making the brakes operable and lubrication. The work was done 'in the field', without much unexpected difficulty. I know some of the people who did the work over a couple of weeks. IIRC the brake job was complete (or nearly complete) when it was found out that a certain RR turned down handling their portion of the move. I don't recall anything that would preclude an FRA waiver from covering the (interchange) move so long as detailed routing is listed/adhered to, but I don't think a waiver obligates a carrier for a special move like general interchange/common carrier rules.
Also, heavy equipment without working brakes can be moved under waiver, with adequate cars attached for braking effort. Not much different than moving defective cars with runaround hoses and a well qualified engineer, but having working brakes on a heavy loco increases safety and likely-hood of getting it moved. If this was moved under waiver, it would more than likely go by special/dimensional service, not in a train that would be humped.
For a shop move, the owner is now Ford, the home shop is Dearborn. The entire move is on one railroad now - there is no more interchange issue.
Noel Weaver wrote:Moving a piece of equipment of this size and weight WITHOUT OPERABLE AIR BRAKES is insane and just plain will not happen. Air brake work on something of this nature will not take place literally out in the middle of nowhere in upstate New York is just about impossible.
already been addressed, the work has already been done, the brakes work.
Those of you who think these things could just be moved are not aware of realities and just plain common sense.
Yet it has been done, and I've seen it done myself. Heck, these two themselves got moved off their siding not that long ago and gee, they must have stopped okay with them.
The weight of a GG-1 is something like UP 3985 and without brakes if the thing were to happen to get away all hell could happen.
A GG1 weighs 475,000 lbs, presuming it's fully equipped and intact and no PCB-laden transformers have been removed.
The 3985 wieghs 1,073,900 lbs. So you're way off there, charlie.
You're telling me no railroad has ever moved three loaded 100 ton cars without brakes before?
Hell I've been involved myself in switching out a string of cars without air that had to weigh close to that much.
Do you want to go screaming down the mainline at 70 with them? No. Can you manage 25 with a through air line and some extra cars for braking power? Has been done hundreds of times if not thousands.
No insurance company will take the risk without millions and millions in costs. Just imagine what a loose object of this size and weight could cause in damages and the lawsuits that would result from such an event? The only practical way to move them would be on a railroad flat car designed to move such heavy equipment if available and I suspect such a car or cars could be available at a cost. Highway move at this location although close to I-88 would be both cumbersome and very expensive to say nothing of the risk of such a move. 4935 from Strasburg to Washington is not nearly the distance and involves only Amtrak. I'll bet they made the brakes operable on the 4935 before such a move took place. 4935 did not lay out in the woods for many years before this move took place and probably the brakes were updated before the move took place. I ran these motors many times and just stopping them on a dime with good brakes takes practice and work, without brakes I would not even want to think what could or would happen.
Two GP38's had no problem stopping one at low speed. None. Add 10 loaded fracking sand or cenemt cars and keep her at 25 the whole way and you should be fine. Maybe it just takes a talented engineer. But, as noted, we can make the brakes work on it, so it doesn't matter so much.
As to insurance, it's just a matter of what you want to pay for the policy. Many railroads self-insure anyways, liability is only a factor for things like excursion trips where passengers are carried.
As I have said, the only practical way to move them is as a shipment on a flat car and I don't think any railroad would refuse such a move provided it meets their safety requirements for a dimensional shipment. Otherwise on site scrap is probably the best they can face although that might too be far in the future.
At 79 feel long, a flatcar move would likely require three cars also traveling at restricted speeds - one for each truck frame and one for the carbody. So it's six of one and half a dozen of the other. Well, except it will weigh more that way.
In any case, without knowing who turned down their portion of the move, and why, everything else is just speculation. Could it be done? Yes. Should it be done? Probably. Will it be done? Who knows.