Western Railroad Discussion > Drgw F7-9B unit

This morning at Wasco, California I saw a Drgw F7 or F9 B unit on a flat car . It was going North on the Union Pacific at 8:30am. It did not have its trucks. Any ideas where it is going?

Posted from iPhone

Roseville

Mike Root
Madras, OR

This FB unit is the former Rio Grande 5763, who
served as one of the locomotives on the famed
"Rio Grande Zephyr" fro 1970 to 1983. This
engine was mentioned in this thread by "cozephyr"
posted on 07/25/17 on 04:19: "DRGW 5763 Passed by
UP 844 7/20/17", which has a nice video of that:

https://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?10,4345300,4347095#msg-4347095

She is going to Roseville to be rebuilt into a
"snail" for one of the rotaries there. This is
according to a comment by "MP555" who said that
in this thread: "RGZ B UNIT WB enroute to Roseville",'
where he posted that info on 09/07/17 at 21:27:

https://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?1,4374411

This is a real shame, because this F B unit was
part of the power for the famed "Rio Grande Zephyr:"
until mid-April of 1983. The "RGZ" was the last
non-Amtrak passenger train in the Lower 48, and we
who were fortunate enough to have seen it and ridden
it still mourn its passing.

Here is a photo, taken in 1977, of this locomotive,
which was built in Sept., 1955:

http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=760345

Why is this a "shame"?

The other B unit and the A unit are at the Colorado Railroad Museum.

How many more are needed?

This special unit took the long--long way around to go from Cheyenne WY to Roseville CA.
The flast with the DRGW F7B unit 5763 earliern went west thru Milford UT--Las Vegas NV--Cajon Pass to West Colton CA SP--UP Yards.
I saw this approx 1 to 2 weeks ago atop a flatcar Westbound on the west Hesperia (Cajon Pass) Railcam at Virtual Railfan.
This very long routing may be due to clearance issues preventing a Reno--Donner Pass direct routing.
I hope this info helps you.
---Daniel

Realist Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Why is this a "shame"?
>
> The other B unit and the A unit are at the
> Colorado Railroad Museum.
>
> How many more are needed?

Because this unit was one of the 3 locomotives used on
the Rio Grande Zephyr, and as such should be preserved
and restored, when funds permit, so people can see a B
unit from the famed Rio Grande Zephyr.

The UP certainly is entitled to do as they wish with
their property, but IMO she should have been donated
to the Colorado Railroad Museum, to join her sister,
the 5771.

And the UP certainly could have found another locomotive
that had little or no historic value to convert into a snail.
Just my 2 cents.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/23/17 20:41 by Margaret_SP_fan.

You can't save everything...

Margaret_SP_fan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Realist Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Why is this a "shame"?
> >
> > The other B unit and the A unit are at the
> > Colorado Railroad Museum.
> >
> > How many more are needed?
>
> Because this unit was one of the 3 locomotives
> used on
> the Rio Grande Zephyr, and as such should be
> preserved
> and restored, when funds permit, so people can see
> a B
> unit from the famed Rio Grande Zephyr.
>
> The UP certainly is entitled to do as they wish
> with
> their property, but IMO she should have been
> donated
> to the Colorado Railroad Museum, to join her
> sister,
> the 5771.
>
> And the UP certainly could have found another
> locomotive
> that had little or no historic value to convert
> into a
> snail. Which you do not agree with, which is
> fine.
> Just my 2 cents.

Ok, so are you are saying that saving 2 out of 3 is not acceptable?

It has to be all 3 or none at all?

CRRM's efforts are of no value without all 3?

There seems to be an assumption that the Colorado RR Museum would have wanted it if offered. They may not have the space or funds to provide for it. Just because "it belongs there" doesn't make it magically happen.

CRM is looking for money to move the tunnel motor up from Coors and just walking around they're going to have an interesting
time finding a spot for it. They're getting very full.

Out

Realist Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Margaret_SP_fan Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Realist Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Why is this a "shame"?
> > >
> > > The other B unit and the A unit are at the
> > > Colorado Railroad Museum.
> > >
> > > How many more are needed?
> >
> > Because this unit was one of the 3 locomotives
> > used on
> > the Rio Grande Zephyr, and as such should be
> > preserved
> > and restored, when funds permit, so people can
> see
> > a B
> > unit from the famed Rio Grande Zephyr.
> >
> > The UP certainly is entitled to do as they wish
> > with
> > their property, but IMO she should have been
> > donated
> > to the Colorado Railroad Museum, to join her
> > sister,
> > the 5771.
> >
> > And the UP certainly could have found another
> > locomotive
> > that had little or no historic value to convert
> > into a
> > snail. Which you do not agree with, which is
> > fine.
> > Just my 2 cents.
>
> Ok, so are you are saying that saving 2 out of 3
> is not acceptable?
>
> It has to be all 3 or none at all?
>
> CRRM's efforts are of no value without all 3?

Realist --
Dearie me...... ALL I said was that I wanted her to
be preserved as the Rio Grande Zephyr B unit she is,
NOT that "It has to be all 3 or nothing," and I
certainly NEVER said or meant that "CRRM's efforts
are of no value without all 3". Never! At leat you
asked questions about what I meant, instead of making
statements about what I meant.

Oh, FYI to all who are following where this F B unit
is on her journey to Roseville --

A recent report on another site stated that she went
to West Colton in what one person said may have been
a mis-routing, as the flatcar she is on was supposed
to have gone directly to Roseville. These things
happen, as a friend likes to say, and she arrived in
Roseville not long ago -- Sat. eve., Sept. 23, 2017.

About the rebuild that she will undergo, a comment was
made on another site that that rebuild could require
this engine to meet current FRA standards if that rebuild
is considered a remake, but THIS is ONLY speculation!!
Only time will tell what happens next. "Stay tuned,"
as they say!

And no one ever thanked me for the info I provided in my
first comment. Oh, well.....



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/23/17 20:35 by Margaret_SP_fan.

trainjunkie --
I am well aware that funds and room never magically
appear, no matter how worthy the item may be, and I
certainly have no way of knowing if the Colorado RR
Museum even wanted the poor DRGW 5763, or, if they
even wanted her, if they have the room and funds to
properly care for her. I was merely expressing my
personal opinion. YMMV, as always, and it certainly
does, from the reactions to my opinions.

About room for things: in a recent discussion on RYPN,
a number of people pointed out that almost all museums
in any area of interest are pretty full, and that it is
not a good idea to donate anything to any museum without
first asking them if they want the item(s) and have the
space for them. And this is too often true for large
things, especially things that run on steel wheels
Shoulda remembered that when I made my comments here.

I still wish the 5763 could have found a good home where
she would have been cosmetically restored. Hey -- I can
dream, can't I?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/23/17 20:39 by Margaret_SP_fan.

Someone is in the attack mode tonight and bent on trying to put words into someone's mouth.

Steve

Thank you very much, SGillings! Your post is
much appreciated by lil' ol' me. :)

UP does not go through Wasco unless detouring on BNSF.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/24/17 00:14 by EricSP.

Margaret_SP_fan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> About the rebuild that she will undergo, a comment
> was
> made on another site that that rebuild could
> require
> this engine to meet current FRA standards if that
> rebuild
> is considered a remake, but THIS is ONLY
> speculation!!

Absolutely it will have to comply with all applicable FRA rules. Do you mean EPA emissions rules? Its build date makes it exempt from any Tier level. But who knows, maybe California will give them money to upgrade the engine.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/24/17 11:14 by MP555.

MP555 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Margaret_SP_fan Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > About the rebuild that she will undergo, a
> comment
> > was
> > made on another site that that rebuild could
> > require
> > this engine to meet current FRA standards if
> that
> > rebuild
> > is considered a remake, but THIS is ONLY
> > speculation!!
>
> Absolutely it will have to comply with all
> applicable FRA rules. Do you mean EPA emissions
> rules? Its build date makes it exempt from any
> Tier level. But who knows, maybe California will
> give them money to upgrade the engine.

Yes, I was asking about the EPA Tier 0 to 4 regs.

It does make sense that IF most of her innards are
still things that were installed when she was built
back in 1955, then she should be exempt from being
required to comply with the EPA's Tier 4 regs, but,
then, I am NOT an expert of any kind on this -- I am
just stating what I have read in the recent past.
Again -- I am NOT an expert! Just someone asking
questions.

But -- is it true that if the rebuild she undergoes
ends up with her having more than a certain number of
or percentage of new parts installed, wouldn't that mean
that she would then be considered "new enough" that she
would then have to comply with all present EPA Tier 4 regs?

And if this is what ends up happening to her, then wouldn't
it have been much less bother and cost for the UP to have
found another locomotive -- one that was already close to
being Tier 4 compliant -- to turn into a snail for one of
their rotaries?

I am asking because I do not know. And -- I am only
asking questions, NOT making statements of facts. Again --
I am NOT an expert -- just someone who is asking questions.

TIA for any reliable info on this fascinating subject!



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/24/17 12:07 by Margaret_SP_fan.

It is also very possible that the Union Pacific is converting it to a rotary snail to (1) make use of it and (2) to remove any signs of it being anything other than just a snail of no importance. Along with ( unfortunately ) it costs money to restore it even cosmetically by any museum and they can't save everything as someone said. After all, when museums ask for money for worthwhile projects they struggle at best.

And still no "in route" photos. Just saying.

Nick Tharalson,
Marion, IA

The UP was angry when the f's went to CRRM right before the merger I have heard

they were probably offered the 3rd unit as well , as well as the jolly rancher cars earlier, which they rejected.

Space and cash tight , this was before the property of the motel was bought.

for years they focused on NG things