Western Railroad Discussion > IRM Santa Fe #92

I heard a rumor that IRM's SF FP-45 was at or near operational for the first time in many years. Can someone confirm this. I could not find any reference to this on their website.

There has been about a dozen videos of it running on Facebook. No sure if any posted here

Posted from Android

That would be great.
Also great to see the progress being made on the one at OERM in Perris, CA.
How many others are operational?
BTW hard to believe these units have been out of service for 20 years already. Time does fly.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/21/17 09:32 by hotrail.

IRM #92 is at NRE in Silvis, IL. Per the IRM Diesel Shop Facebook page, it is being re-trucked with the correct sideframes.
If you do facebook, pics and update for the 92 as well as The Rock 4506 are available at: https://www.facebook.com/IRMDieselShop/

Good job guys! These were truly iconic locomotives

August 92, Joliet, IL.

Bob Jordan

---

pics can be great even on a rainy day

Back in the early 90s, there was nothing on rails more exciting than one of those on the point of an ATSF freight.

Great news about the Santa Fe 92! Almost done -- YAY!!
What a beautiful locomotive! I just wish that she could
again pull fast freights on the main line -- once in a
while. Hey -- I can ream, can't I? Good job, everyone
at IRM and NRE!

Bob Jordan --
That is a gorgeous photo of a gorgeous locomotive.
Thanks so much for posting it here.

What was different about the flexicoils already under it??

SD45X Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What was different about the flexicoils already
> under it??

It didn't have the outside mounted brake cylinders: http://www.irm.org/gallery/ATSF92/aaa

CPR_4000 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> SD45X Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > What was different about the flexicoils already
> > under it??
>
> It didn't have the outside mounted brake
> cylinders: http://www.irm.org/gallery/ATSF92/aaa

How did the wrong trucks get under it?

needles_sub Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> How did the wrong trucks get under it?

Six-axle Flexicoils are pretty much interchangeable between EMD diesels of the same generation. Rather than keep a loco in the shop waiting on its original components to be repaired or rebuilt, it is common to just take like components from stock on-hand and the removed components, after the truck/motor/air brake shop gets done with them, go back into inventory to ultimately be placed under another unit.

Basically, parts is parts.

Somewhere along the line the original trucks with the high-mounted brake cylinders were swapped for a pair with low-mounted brake cylinders, probably off an SD40 or SD45. In the same way, the prime mover that arrived in the 92 was from all appearances NOT the original 20-645 and badly freeze-damaged, thus the trip to NRE in the first place.

NZ

NebraskaZephyr Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> needles_sub Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > How did the wrong trucks get under it?
>
> Six-axle Flexicoils are pretty much
> interchangeable between EMD diesels of the same
> generation. Rather than keep a loco in the shop
> waiting on its original components to be repaired
> or rebuilt, it is common to just take like
> components from stock on-hand and the removed
> components, after the truck/motor/air brake shop
> gets done with them, go back into inventory to
> ultimately be placed under another unit.
>
> Basically, parts is parts.
>
> Somewhere along the line the original trucks with
> the high-mounted brake cylinders were swapped for
> a pair with low-mounted brake cylinders, probably
> off an SD40 or SD45. In the same way, the prime
> mover that arrived in the 92 was from all
> appearances NOT the original 20-645 and badly
> freeze-damaged, thus the trip to NRE in the first
> place.
>
> NZ

Thanks for the answer JP

NZ,

You definitely do NOT what those SD trucks with the damned low mounted brake cylinders!!!! An EXCELLENT choice to swap them out.

NebraskaZephyr --
Thanks so much for the very interesting info about
the 92's original prime mover. I had no idea it was
even there, given what I had read about the crankshafts'
on those 20-cylinder monsters being so long they sagged
under their own weight. That, and the improved performance
of the newer GE locomotives the RRs later bought, was a
good reason for the RRs to rebuild these 20-cylinder beasts
and blank off 4 of the cylinders and shorten the crankshafts
in order to solve that problem.

And I knew that parts have always been interchangeable, and
that that has been true for a very long time, including the
steam era. For instance, the SP 2472 has parts from at least
17 different locomotives. At least those are the numbers I
saw when we did her very first restoration. She could have
parts fro other locomotives that I did not see and record.

The Santa Fe 92 is one gorgeous locomotive! What a classy and
elegant and beautiful paint scheme!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/22/17 00:59 by Margaret_SP_fan.

Margaret_SP_fan Wrote:

> That, and the improved performance
> of the newer GE locomotives the RRs later bought,
> was a good reason for the RRs to rebuild these
> 20-cylinder beasts and blank off 4 of the cylinders and shorten the
> crankshafts in order to solve that problem.

The business of sawing four cylinders off a 20-cylinder block to get a 16-cylinder prime mover was a fairly late innovation, coming along in the 1990's as most remaining SD45's were about to enter their third decade of service. MK did a bunch for SP in the SD40M-2 rebuilds of the 1990's, and others have followed suit, but Santa Fe/BNSF didn't partake. Other than a dozen SD45's re-engined with genuine 16-645's in the 1980's, four more SD45's that briefly carried Sulzer prime movers, and one SD45-2 re-engined by Caterpillar, Santa Fe left the 20-cyinder prime movers intact in its large fleet of assorted "45's" right up to retirement.

Glad to hear 92 is being restored.

Margaret_SP_fan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> NebraskaZephyr --
> Thanks so much for the very interesting info
> about
> the 92's original prime mover. I had no idea it
> was
> even there, given what I had read about the
> crankshafts'
> on those 20-cylinder monsters being so long they
> sagged
> under their own weight. That, and the improved
> performance
> of the newer GE locomotives the RRs later bought,
> was a
> good reason for the RRs to rebuild these
> 20-cylinder beasts
> and blank off 4 of the cylinders and shorten the
> crankshafts
> in order to solve that problem.

Lets clear this myth about the 20 cylinder "crankshaft problem". The crankshaft was NOT the "problem"!!!!!!! The insufficient welding for the main bearing support forgings was the root cause, i.e. the upper attachment areas of the main bearing forgings was NOT properly welded into the lower V Section of the crankcase. Thus, when any one or more of the main bearing forgings "broke loose" from the crankcase, full support for the crankshaft was lost, bending the shaft. Obviously no crankshaft will tolerate "bending during rotation", which broke the shaft between a main bearing and a crank throw journal. Once the root cause was discovered, the manufacturing process was improved for the 20 cylinder crankcase, and thus all 16 AND 20 cylinder crankcases with "72J" and newer had no more main bearing issues. The BN RR worked a "deal" with EMD for a "Policy Adjustment" on all their 45 series units, and all the "old" 20 cylinder crankcases were changed-out and replaced with the newer "72J" or later crankcases.

HotWater Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Margaret_SP_fan Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > NebraskaZephyr --
> > Thanks so much for the very interesting info
> > about
> > the 92's original prime mover. I had no idea
> it
> > was
> > even there, given what I had read about the
> > crankshafts'
> > on those 20-cylinder monsters being so long
> they
> > sagged
> > under their own weight. That, and the improved
> > performance
> > of the newer GE locomotives the RRs later
> bought,
> > was a
> > good reason for the RRs to rebuild these
> > 20-cylinder beasts
> > and blank off 4 of the cylinders and shorten
> the
> > crankshafts
> > in order to solve that problem.
>
> Lets clear this myth about the 20 cylinder
> "crankshaft problem". The crankshaft was NOT the
> "problem"!!!!!!! The insufficient welding for the
> main bearing support forgings was the root cause,
> i.e. the upper attachment areas of the main
> bearing forgings was NOT properly welded into the
> lower V Section of the crankcase. Thus, when any
> one or more of the main bearing forgings "broke
> loose" from the crankcase, full support for the
> crankshaft was lost, bending the shaft. Obviously
> no crankshaft will tolerate "bending during
> rotation", which broke the shaft between a main
> bearing and a crank throw journal. Once the root
> cause was discovered, the manufacturing process
> was improved for the 20 cylinder crankcase, and
> thus all 16 AND 20 cylinder crankcases with "72J"
> and newer had no more main bearing issues. The BN
> RR worked a "deal" with EMD for a "Policy
> Adjustment" on all their 45 series units, and all
> the "old" 20 cylinder crankcases were changed-out
> and replaced with the newer "72J" or later
> crankcases.

Thanks for this, Hot Water. It clears up a lot of misinformation over the years.

I've also heard the demise of the 20 cylinder engine can be traced to excessive fuel
use, which given the four extra cylinders, seems reasonable. And think about the
advances in engine technology since 1966 when the SD45 at 3,600hp came out. Today,
engines are rated at 4,400hp with 12 cylinders.

Nick Tharalson,
Marion, IA

Evan_Werkema Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Margaret_SP_fan Wrote:
>
> > That, and the improved performance
> > of the newer GE locomotives the RRs later
> bought,
> > was a good reason for the RRs to rebuild these
> > 20-cylinder beasts and blank off 4 of the
> cylinders and shorten the
> > crankshafts in order to solve that problem.
>
> The business of sawing four cylinders off a
> 20-cylinder block to get a 16-cylinder prime mover
> was a fairly late innovation, coming along in the
> 1990's as most remaining SD45's were about to
> enter their third decade of service. MK did a
> bunch for SP in the SD40M-2 rebuilds of the
> 1990's, and others have followed suit, but Santa
> Fe/BNSF didn't partake. Other than a dozen SD45's
> re-engined with genuine 16-645's in the 1980's,
> four more SD45's that briefly carried Sulzer prime
> movers, and one SD45-2 re-engined by Caterpillar,
> Santa Fe left the 20-cyinder prime movers intact
> in its large fleet of assorted "45's" right up to
> retirement.
>
> Glad to hear 92 is being restored.

Evan,

MK began working on taking V20's and cutting them down in 1989.  Many said it wouldn't work but many of the MPI SD40M-2 rebuilds served as test beds for the engines.  Even though MK used 15 SD45's* to fill the CSX SD40M-2 order (8439-8488) none received "cut down" V16's.  Infact, CSX specified F type power assemblies (used in the 50 series) thus all received 72J block engines.  The cores used for the MPI units were a great source of blocks for the CSX program and the MPI units got a mix of blocks.

With respect to the ATSF units.  Didn't some of the SD45's with V16's get 645F engines rated at 3500 hp?  Also, didn't the Sulzers end up being reequipped with V20-645E3's?  Lastly, if I recall correctly, didn't the ex ATSF SD45-2 ended up getting a V20-645E3 also re installed after the termination of MK's disastrous MK5000 program (as either a MK or MPI unit)?

*  As a side note, the 15 SD40M-2's created from SD45's were completely reconfigured by MK.  There are only two minor spotting features to distinguish an ex 45 from a 40.  There is a different placement of one of the handrail stanchions in front of the fireman's side cab door and the MK fabricated handbrake stand on the reared of the unit is slightly different.  Everything else was changed to match.