Western Railroad Discussion > Locomotive Number Boards - 5 numbers?

With the ever increasing numbers of locomotives coming on line, is there a capacity within the various UP, BNSF and other RR despatch computers to record 5 numbers, eg UP69366?

Mike McInerney

I don't think (at this time) the U.S. Railroad Computer systems are
capble of that. I know that the Mexican Railroads of old had engines
in the 5 digit numbers along with some alpha-numeric numbers.

I think that is one reason the UP came up with the "Y" designation
so they wouldn't have to go over 9999. Of course, the UP and BNSF could start using #'s 1-100 without any problem.

Have a good Night.

At some point the number of numerals will get so great that opposing trains won't be able to identify the trains they're meeting reliably. I don't know if five is the magic number, but the possibility that it is would be a good reason for finding alternatives to going to five digits from four, whatever the computer capacity may be.

I know of only one U.S. Railroad that ever used 5 digit numbers, that being the Milwaukee from 1915 until 1939.

There really is not much point in going with more that four numbers so long as they can use various initials. As noted, identifying trains with more than four digits in the engine number would become more difficult, and reprogramming computer systems would be an immense amount of work and expense (especially since there are numerous computer systems that need to interact with each other).

What I see happening *when* the railroads get to the final mergers and we get two railroads, think they won't go to 5-digit numbers but instead either keep exsisting reporting marks and just repaint all the locomotives into each railroads respective scheme, or come up with a set of new reporting marks, like 6-axle road locomotives would be the railroads intials itself like UP or NS, 4-axle road switchers for locals would be have intials of UPL or NSL, and all switcher type locomotives would be UPY or NSY etc etc etc. With that system you could have up to 30,000 locomotives and not have to use 5-digit numbers. Just my take on it

Don't forget the major railroads that went through mergers still have ownership of the old reporting marks.

BNSF could for example have new units delivered in H3 with BNSF on the long hood. Under the cab windows would be BN, ATSF, CB&Q, GN or any of the railroad reporting marks that made up the BNSF.

The same is true for the -

UP - SP, DRGW, WP, MP
NS - SR, N&W, NKP, PRR
CSXT - C&O, B&O, RF&P, NYC

... and so on.

The Southern railway back east did this all the time. That is have the unit painted Southern green, but have the unit sublettered under the cab with the original railroad reporting marks.

It might confuse the heck out of the railfans, but the engineers would use the reporting mark indicated on the FRA card.

It will be interesting to see who runs out of numbers first.

Oh and yes, NdM did have five digit locomotive numbers. I don't think any of them ever made it across the boarder however.

For the record, Ferromex and Ferrosur still have 5 digit engines on their rosters. I have seen Ferromex's dispatching center, track bulletins and track warrants. All are in the same format as BNSF's, looking very similar. Ferrosur's Warrants and bulletins are identical to UP's. Since these railroads are up to US class 1 standards, I'd believe that US railroads computers are capable of handling 5 digit numbers.

-FSR 11055 (C30-7) adding cars to the rear of a Directo Veracruz - Puebla at Orizaba, Verc.

-FSR 14523 (Super 7) working in helper service at Acultzingo, Verc.

-FSR 14522 (Super 7) about to enter El Mexicano at Puente Colorado, Puebla.

Nate

---

---

---

czephyr17 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> There really is not much point in going with more
> that four numbers so long as they can use various
> initials. As noted, identifying trains with more
> than four digits in the engine number would become
> more difficult, and reprogramming computer systems
> would be an immense amount of work and expense
> (especially since there are numerous computer
> systems that need to interact with each other).

Don't forget, though, that the initial must appear in the numberboard as well! So from the standpoints of whether there's enough space on the numberboard or reading it (initial + four digits) from another train, you've still got the same problem...

Looks like we'll have to start painting locos in the schemes of merged roads. <G> Some new DRGW units, anyone?

BTW, here's an example of a UPY unit, displaying the "Y" in the (only three-digit) numberboard:
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=331810

Take care,
-Wes

DRGW Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> czephyr17 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > There really is not much point in going with
> more
> > that four numbers so long as they can use
> various
> > initials. As noted, identifying trains with
> more
> > than four digits in the engine number would
> become
> > more difficult, and reprogramming computer
> systems
> > would be an immense amount of work and expense
> > (especially since there are numerous computer
> > systems that need to interact with each other).
>
> Don't forget, though, that the initial must appear
> in the numberboard as well! So from the
> standpoints of whether there's enough space on the
> numberboard or reading it (initial + four digits)
> from another train, you've still got the same
> problem...
>
> Looks like we'll have to start painting locos in
> the schemes of merged roads. Some new DRGW
> units, anyone?
>
> BTW, here's an example of a UPY unit, displaying
> the "Y" in the (only three-digit) numberboard:
> http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?
> id=331810
>
> Take care,
> -Wes

Therefore there is a far greater "4 characters" available in an alpha-numeric arrangement

Eg A000 to A999 is 1000 units
A to Z = 26!

AA00 to AZ99 if my maths are rough enough is "plenty"
Those ranges would only have be careful of any "unclear/clashing" alpha-numeric arrangements.

Mike

The AAR equipment register cannot handle more than 4 digits for locomotives. This could be changed at some point, but I doubt it. The railroads will just apply for new reporting marks. Like UPSD for EMDs or UPGE for GEs.

Another point is that UP didn't even need the UPY series, because they have 9985 numbers available (not including the heritage stuff), and about only 7,500 units.

The Equipment register says if there are more than 4 digits on a locomotive recieved in interchange, the first 4 are to be used. If it is a railcar with more than 6 digits, the first six are to be used.

As far as I know the Ferromex 5 digits don't come into the states, but if one were to, that is probebly what would happen.

Also the reporting marks do not need to be on the numberboard itself, it can be next to or above it, as with the UP Heritage SD70ACEs. You could even get away with just putting the initials on the nose.

...
Foamer

although they're not actually engines any more, what about the Amtrak cabbage
cars? They're used as the identifying locomotive on trains, and they're 5 digits
(basically the original F40PH number with a 90 in front of it)