Western Railroad Discussion > A tribute to the SD9043MAC

A tribute to the SD9043MAC locos that soon will leave The Union Pacific system





Judah Rice
Austin,TX



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/14/13 17:07 by judahrice.

---

I kinda feel sorry for this model of locomotive. Only the Union Pacific purchased any signification quantity of them (unless I am mistaken!) and they have always been a ugly dog of the fleet. There was so much promise when the SD9043MAC came onto the scene. They were to run for awhile at a minor 4300 horsepower until the brute of a prime mover was perfected and them...boom...they were to be the darlings of the UP system, pulling with a massive 6000 horsepower. But something went wrong, the new prime mover never showed and the units would spend the remainder of their time doing dog's work. Since they weren't at full power when new, they were for some reason treated like older power and never got "plum" assignments. By the time it was decided to keep them around at the lower horsepower, they weren't new anymore, the SD70ACE's and ES44's were the prime of the fleet and old 9043MAC's were left to the wind.

The old bright side to this sad, locomotive situation is the Indiana Rail Road. They got a small fleet of unwanted 9043's and made the their own. Today the INRD 9000 series pull everything and seem to show up anywhere east of Little Rock from time to time.

Canadian Pacific bought 61, and CEFX bought 40/

Thank god they're gone!!

Posted from iPhone

Last I read, they are not done for. The units with frame cracks are stored waiting for a fix. The others that do not have frame cracks are still running. Has that changed?

I saw three on a manifest in Iowa a couple of weeks ago. Two on the point and one as a DPU. Not sure if they're still out running or not.

John Crisanti
Longmont, CO

BNSF6400 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I kinda feel sorry for this model of locomotive.
> Only the Union Pacific purchased any signification
> quantity of them (unless I am mistaken!) and they
> have always been a ugly dog of the fleet. There
> was so much promise when the SD9043MAC came onto
> the scene. They were to run for awhile at a minor
> 4300 horsepower until the brute of a prime mover
> was perfected and them...boom...they were to be
> the darlings of the UP system, pulling with a
> massive 6000 horsepower. But something went
> wrong, the new prime mover never showed and the
> units would spend the remainder of their time
> doing dog's work. Since they weren't at full
> power when new, they were for some reason treated
> like older power and never got "plum" assignments.
> By the time it was decided to keep them around at
> the lower horsepower, they weren't new anymore,
> the SD70ACE's and ES44's were the prime of the
> fleet and old 9043MAC's were left to the wind.
>

I don't feel that they were put out to pasture any more than other old models are replaced by newer units with more horsepower, more electrical technology, better fuel mileage, and fewer emissions. They were used at what they were best suited for and that was pulling heavy tonnage such as coal trains. They were good units when new, even at a "measly" 4300 HP. They did have some teething problems with the computer system at first which led us to call them "Hals" (from the computer in 2001 a Space Odyssey) where the computer would take over the air brakes when in trail in a consist and release the train brakes.
As with anything new they were nice to run but after they were worn out and the were/are still using them I hate to see one on the point in my consist as they ride like crap and the throttle and air brake controls are totally obsolete the way they were set up. They earned their keep for the UP but it's time to send them to the scrap heap.-BMT

All they need is a good overhaul and the cabs updating they are not that old

Posted from Android

What was so bad about them? One would think they would run identical to the BNSF SD70MAC's, and those units were the best pullers around in the 90's.

I hate running them, I have more computer crashes and air brake failures while on the road with 9043's than any other engine. They ranked right up with the SD50's

I wouldn't say they were never given plumb assignments. Here the 8255 leads a priority container train through Echo Canyon in June 2009. Later I caught three SD9043MACs (UP 8111, 8240, 8093) leading a heavy manifest through Emory in 2010.

James Belmont
Salt Lake City, UT

---

---

ppcx032 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I hate running them, I have more computer crashes
> and air brake failures while on the road with
> 9043's than any other engine. They ranked right up
> with the SD50's

I never had a road failure with one, and, am an "EMD Man." Am not on here as much as I used to be--wasn't aware that they were being sidelined? I will agree, tho, that even when brand new, the so-called "Earthquake Mode" was a bit unnerving. Which led me to believe that GE was more advanced from the get-go than EMD with regard to AC traction? The hoggers on here will know what I'm talking about: where you are bounced about a foot off your seat if starting a very, very heavy train--otherwise, at night, the things are so quiet inside that the first time I got one I couldn't tell I was moving. Then on the other hand, at speed, those early I-Cabs...the bouncing was incredible. A problem the SD70Ms most certainly did not have.

Also, I never liked the EMD computer screens compared to the GEs. Hate to admit that. Darn it--hard admission for me. But your "glass cockpit" is your control interface, is it not? And while it's a degree better in the SD70ACes (a lot better in fact), the GE computuer screens are just so user-friendly and make so much sense. Otherwise, tho, MECHANICALLY, a loco that was built to eventually receive a 6000 HP prime mover but never did rise above a 4300 710, had excess radiator coollng capacity, and I agree that a thorough rebuild (and new computer screens and rubber donuts more along the lines of the I-Cab SD70ACes should resolve the issues with these units?!?). But maybe right now it's simply cheaper to buy/lease (I don't know the percentage of leased v. bought, there's always a mix every year) new power as opposed to keeping these, or, at least "all of 'em."

Its more complicated than that RED, they have the POS SD90 electrical system and computer controls which the other posters have enlightened us by describing the pains of that system. One of the CEFX SD90's while on UP, used to change to all question marks for each value on both screens and got the nickname "The Riddler".

The electricals can be rewired with ACe type parts while keeping the origanal alternator like the ones that were repowered and sent to Australia

Posted from Android

The fact that Canadian Pacific ran their MLW M630/636's, which they hated, for 25 years, and has 4O year old SD40-2's in service, while the 9043MAC's were the first units stored when things slowed down & are now up for sale at 15 years of age, tells you all you need to know.

NSDTK Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The electricals can be rewired with ACe type parts
> while keeping the origanal alternator like the
> ones that were repowered and sent to Australia
>
> Posted from Android


And you can put lip stick on a pig and its still a pig my friend. I highly doubt the economics of such a plan would kill it instantly on so many units compared to a couple for a huge mining company.

I recall these things first being assigned to coal trains when new. Years later, they migrated across the system. More recently, they've been mixed into PNW lumber trains. I wouldn't say they a failure, just didn't meet the high horsepower potential that was envisioned.

NSDTK Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The electricals can be rewired with ACe type parts
> while keeping the origanal alternator like the
> ones that were repowered and sent to Australia
>
> Posted from Android


The former UP SD90MAC-H's that were purchased by FMG were rebuilt to SD9043MAC specs. Nothing was ever said about them receiving any such electrical upgrade. 4 were simply rebuilt in-kind and shipped to Australia for immediate placement into service with plans to swap the 265H prime movers for 16-710's at a later date.

Bryan Jones
Brooks, KY
Bryan's Train Photos

The UP SD9043MAC's aren't going anywhere. They are being inspected for the frame cracks, which are located where the fuel tank mounts o the frame, and units with cracks are being placed into storage while those without cracks will remain in service. UP and EMD are working together on a permanent repair to correct the cracks. Once they decide on a fix the units will be cycled through the shops for repair and returned to service.

Bryan Jones
Brooks, KY
Bryan's Train Photos

I have had more road failures with the SD90/43's than any other locomotive I've ran. The most memorable one was when I got the blue screen of death at 50 mph on a loaded DP coal train. That brought us to a grinding halt very quickly. Ended up having to reboot the computer, relink the DP and limp 12 miles down the track to get to 2 main track out of the way so we could get a new leader. We made it there after 2 more BSOD's, rebooting and relinking again each time.