Steam & Excursion > UP E-Unit Trio Question

We all read the seemingly- regular complaints about how UP's E9A's #949 and #951 look strange without their nose doors, grab irons and associated hardware. Is there some reason why they couldn't paint the outline of a door, install the grab irons, etc. to give the correct appearance? Would it fool an unsuspecting engineer or crew member and thus create a safety hazard? Is there an FRA regulation that would prohibit the appearance of a nose door that doesn't function as a door? I realize it's not a huge priority and UP can do whatever they want with their engines, I'm just curious.

A related question is do the same engineers always operate the units, or do different engineers draw the assignment depending on where the E-units operate?

I believe you are correct, simulating a door that is not there with attendant grabirons with no purpose becomes a safety issue. === === = === JLH

Does anyone recall when UP removed those nose doors and grabirons?  Thankls!

Well let's just keep our fingers crossed that the E-9's are maintained and keep running ... there be some issues there in Cheyenne ... "fake" doors or not, I still would like to see the 951 and 949 out on the road ...

Odyssey
Evergreen, CO

And it was the very lack of a nose door that doomed the E3s, 5s and 6s.  Gov't. came with
a nose door rule to facilitate access from the train. They said it was a "safety issue".  Today
the lack of a nose door becomes a "security for the cab crew" issue. Times change,
thoughts change.

As far as safety goes, flush mounted nose doors may collapse inward in a road crossing collision allowing flammable material or other things directly in to the cab. All modern units have overlapping doors that are much stronger and they are designed to open outward. 

They lost the nose doors in July of 2003.  They came back from North Little Rock minus the nose doors, still had the handles, and had the wrong (SD70 style) wings.  The wing decals were very quickly corrected.

The locomotives are operated by whomever draws the special in the pool.  That was one reason for their rebuild to E38-2's -- so that anyone could operate them with minimal additional training.

Nathan Beauheim
Cheyenne, WY



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/27/15 08:05 by nathan314.

---

Odyssey Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well let's just keep our fingers crossed that the
> E-9's are maintained and keep running ... there be
> some issues there in Cheyenne ... "fake" doors or
> not, I still would like to see the 951 and 949 out
> on the road ...
>
> Odyssey
> Evergreen, CO

Well said, fake doors is bad, but FAKE leaders is much worse!

Larry Dodgion
Wilsonville, OR

Palhoghead Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> As far as safety goes, flush mounted nose doors
> may collapse inward in a road crossing collision
> allowing flammable material or other things
> directly in to the cab. All modern units have
> overlapping doors that are much stronger and they
> are designed to open outward. 

There are documented cases where cab occupants have been
killed by just that scenario on E units, F units and other
cab-type units with inward-opening nose doors.  The impact
tears the door open and stuff comes into the cab violently.

Bad enough if it's something like gravel, but imagine hitting
a gasoline truck.  A UP guy was killed when the 6936 hit
a load of mud in Louisiana because the nose door blew
inward and buried him with mud.

Yet, it's obvious certain fickle, fundamentalist, all-or-nothing foamers
could care less about that, since it makes their photos look odd. To
them, anyway. The other 99.9% know a good thing when they have
it in their viewfinder..

It could be solved by cutting the cabs off the 2 A's and make them
into B units. Or scrap the A units.

Actually, the I thought the accedent with 6936 where it hit a gravel  truck and a crew member was killed because the nose door failed I though was what prompted the removal of thee nose doors on everything..

it was

It was a truckload of mud from a sugar cane field.

What the heck difference does it make?  An inward-opening
door failed in the impact and a man died from being buried in
mud. The other people in the cab nearly drowned in mud, too.

Again, to quote the words of a UP Steam engineer who sadly
is no longer with us: "If you don't like the way it looks, then
stop looking at it."

And yet the nose door on #6936 was somehow reinforced or modified to address the issue of it opening inward upon a collision without altering its basic appearance. Does it open outward now?

davew833 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> And yet the nose door on #6936 was somehow
> reinforced or modified to address the issue of it
> opening inward upon a collision without altering
> its basic appearance. Does it open outward now?

A second, very thick wall with another door was installed
inside the nose behind the existing front door of the 6936.

There isn't room in the nose for such a solution on an E or
F unit.  There might be on a PA, since that nose is much
longer than an F or E.

There was also a bad accident on the IC in the early 1970's (pre-Amtrak). A passenger train with an E8 leader hit a gasoline truck at speed and flaming gasoline entered the carbody through the nose door and number board openings killing the crew.

Posted from iPhone

UP's city of denver had a wreck like that

Realist Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Palhoghead Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > As far as safety goes, flush mounted nose doors
> > may collapse inward in a road crossing
> collision
> > allowing flammable material or other things
> > directly in to the cab. All modern units have
> > overlapping doors that are much stronger and
> they
> > are designed to open outward. 
>
> There are documented cases where cab occupants
> have been
> killed by just that scenario on E units, F units
> and other
> cab-type units with inward-opening nose doors. 
> The impact
> tears the door open and stuff comes into the cab
> violently.
>
> Bad enough if it's something like gravel, but
> imagine hitting
> a gasoline truck.  A UP guy was killed when the
> 6936 hit
> a load of mud in Louisiana because the nose door
> blew
> inward and buried him with mud.
>
> Yet, it's obvious certain fickle, fundamentalist,
> all-or-nothing foamers
> could care less about that, since it makes their
> photos look odd. To
> them, anyway. The other 99.9% know a good thing
> when they have
> it in their viewfinder..
>
> It could be solved by cutting the cabs off the 2
> A's and make them
> into B units. Or scrap the A units.

Realist, if there was a Response of the Day, you just won today's,  especially your last two paragraphs.  And we wonder why railroads think we're a bunch of ___________.

an engineer was killed in a F-40 in Florida when it struck a gasoline truck at a crossing ...

Pretty sure nobody was advocating putting crews in more danger so their photos look better. The OP asked about painting a fake door on the E's, not reinstalling a real one.

My $0.02 is that losing the ditch lights and adding a gyralite under the headlight would do a good job filling the empty space. Though I'm sure plenty of other fans would consider that an abomination if it's not "prototypical" for UP E's. I will photograph them and appreciate UP for keeping them around regardless.

Realist Wrote:
-------------------------------.
>
> Yet, it's obvious certain fickle, fundamentalist,
> all-or-nothing foamers
> could care less about that, since it makes their
> photos look odd. To
> them, anyway. The other 99.9% know a good thing
> when they have
> it in their viewfinder..
>

Posted from Android

Nomad Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Pretty sure nobody was advocating putting crews in
> more danger so their photos look better. The OP
> asked about painting a fake door on the E's, not
> reinstalling a real one.
>
> My $0.02 is that losing the ditch lights and
> adding a gyralite under the headlight would do a
> good job filling the empty space. Though I'm sure
> plenty of other fans would consider that an
> abomination if it's not "prototypical" for UP E's.
> I will photograph them and appreciate UP for
> keeping them around regardless.
>
> Realist Wrote:
> -------------------------------.
> >
> > Yet, it's obvious certain fickle,
> fundamentalist,
> > all-or-nothing foamers
> > could care less about that, since it makes
> their
> > photos look odd. To
> > them, anyway. The other 99.9% know a good thing
> > when they have
> > it in their viewfinder..
> >
>
> Posted from Android

It would be prototypical for some, but not all, UP E units.

And not these two.