Nostalgia & History > 3 Norfolk Western on the Santa Fe in September 1978

The leader was ATSF SD45 5508.  Roger Puta was in the Tehachapis, but can you ID the locations?  The photos are in the sequence he shot them.

Theories on why the NW power?

Thanks,
Marty Bernerd

---

---

---

Looks like the Franklin Canyon area west of Martinez, CA. to me.  Probably train #199.


Allen



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12/16/16 21:44 by bradleymckay.

The first two were taken on the hillside timetable east of the Dutra Road underpass in Franklin Canyon near Martinez, CA.  Tunnel 2 is just out of the frame in the distance on the left in the second shot.  The third was taken just east of the big cut east of Pinole, CA:

https://goo.gl/maps/Ugz9rCaiQ5w

The spot used to be known as Herpoco for the nearby, long-gone Hercules Powder Co.  The train is westbound.  Santa Fe was power short in 1978 and leased a lot of power from N&W and other eastern roads:

http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?11,3813076
http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?11,3431433,3434464#3434464
http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?11,3111309
http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?11,2688708
http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?11,2635149
http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?1,112652

> Theories on why the NW power?
>
> Thanks,
> Marty Bernerd

A theory is not necessary. The extended N&W Clerk's Strike was going. Santa Fe was taking broken N&W units and fixing them, sending back what N&W needed, and using the rest itself.

I remember seeing lots of NW power on the Santa Fe in the LA area mid 70's (75-76-77)...I think I remember hearing that the Santa Fe were short on power, but then again I was 10 years old

A chronic, multi-railroad power crunch affected western roads after the '74/'75 recession - which led to widespread leasing - while EMD and GE were buried in new orders to help alleviate that problem. Santa Fe had retired 50 DL600b's in '74, and was in the process of rebuilding their 80 SD24's into SD26's. For them, they started leasing units in 1977 - hitting up the CN, C&NW, and B&LE. In 1978, it was all N&W units that were leased. In 1979 and 1980, they leased both Chessie and N&W units. In 1981, they leased brand new SP SD40T-2's. By 1982, another recession cooled off the economy, just in time to see the last of the new units ordered arriving on the property. This included GP39-2's, SD40-2's, B23-7's, and C30-7's.

Bob

ATSF100WEST......Out

ts1457 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > Theories on why the NW power?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Marty Bernard
>
> A theory is not necessary. The extended N&W
> Clerk's Strike was going. Santa Fe was taking
> broken N&W units and fixing them, sending back
> what N&W needed, and using the rest itself.

Bet they loved that 1307 with no dynamics.

ATSF100WEST Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A chronic, multi-railroad power crunch affected
> western roads after the '74/'75 recession - which
> led to widespread leasing - while EMD and GE were
> buried in new orders to help alleviate that
> problem. Santa Fe had retired 50 DL600b's in '74,
> and was in the process of rebuilding their 80
> SD24's into SD26's. For them, they started leasing
> units in 1977 - hitting up the CN, C&NW, and B&LE.
> In 1978, it was all N&W units that were leased. In
> 1979 and 1980, they leased both Chessie and N&W
> units. In 1981, they leased brand new SP
> SD40T-2's. By 1982, another recession cooled off
> the economy, just in time to see the last of the
> new units ordered arriving on the property. This
> included GP39-2's, SD40-2's, B23-7's, and
> C30-7's.
>
> Bob
>
> ATSF100WEST......Out

Yes, Santa Fe used N&W power at other times during the 1970s, but it was particularly prominent during the Clerk's Strike (7/10 - 9/30 1978). 

halfmoonharold Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Bet they loved that 1307 with no dynamics.

I wonder if the dynamics passed through that unit?

I am thinking  back during that time period  that some old Wabash units did not pass the dynamics through.


 

Ordered by Wabash as their 553, delivered as N&W 1307. The traing SD45's would still have had functioning D/B's.

Bob

ATSF100WEST......Out


halfmoonharold Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Bet they loved that 1307 with no dynamics.

Bottom line, with the BRAC strike, and off-peak season for mining, were the two factors in their decision to tap the N&W for the LEASE (of their glut) of stored locomotives. In subsequent years' leases, they needed Chessie System units to augment their needs.

Bob

ATSF100WEST......Out


ts1457 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > ATSF100WEST......Out
>
> Yes, Santa Fe used N&W power at other times during
> the 1970s, but it was particularly prominent
> during the Clerk's Strike (7/10 - 9/30 1978). 

They sent the leased power with major component failures back to the home road, and obtained working replacements in their place. Only minor (running repairs) were handled by the Santa Fe. That is why the unit list kept changing. I have the Santa fe memos from that years' lease, and a annotated list of unit numbers. The Santa Fe also was fortunate to receieve brand new units, just delivered to the N&W, including SD40-2's and C30-7's.

Bob

ATSF100WEST......Out

ts1457 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Santa Fe was taking
> broken N&W units and fixing them, sending back
> what N&W needed, and using the rest itself.

ATSF100WEST Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ordered by Wabash as their 553, delivered as N&W
> 1307. The traing SD45's would still have had
> functioning D/B's.
>
> Bob

I guess certain wires on the MU cable control the dynamics. Maybe it is a false memory, but I seem to recall a cab ride on the N&W back during that time period where we had a similar unit in the consist. The engineer was complaining that the dynamics did not pass through. I think his statement was coupled with a remark about the idiots at SOC. Wabash did not use dynamics. Was Wabash cheap enough to leave a few wires out? Probably.

Jack

ATSF100WEST Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> They sent the leased power with major component
> failures back to the home road, and obtained
> working replacements in their place. Only minor
> (running repairs) were handled by the Santa Fe.
> That is why the unit list kept changing. I have
> the Santa fe memos from that years' lease, and a
> annotated list of unit numbers. The Santa Fe also
> was fortunate to receieve brand new units, just
> delivered to the N&W, including SD40-2's and
> C30-7's.
>
> Bob
>
> ATSF100WEST......Out

OK

Yup, made things a bit more interesting, Bakersfield.

Out

---

bleeding blue

That N&W engineer may have been dealing with an ex-Wabash "original" GP7. They were ordered without M.U. but it was added later by the Decatur shops. They also added nose M.U. to their F7's there. That said, I can't opine as to whether Wabash abandoned "recommended practice" by omitting the cabling for D/B controls (leaving dummy male terminals). Anything that came stock from E.M.D. had "pass-through" cabling for all locomotive features. The consist that Roger shot and Marty shared here - with GP35 1307 - obviously had "pass-through" capability; otherwise, they would have put the SD45's in the second and third position, and left the 1307 as the trailing unit. "Hot Water" (Jack) here on T.O. could shed some more light on the subject - as he was an E.M.D. Field Service Engineer.

Bob

ATSF100WEST......Out


ts1457 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ATSF100WEST Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Ordered by Wabash as their 553, delivered as
> N&W
> > 1307. The traing SD45's would still have had
> > functioning D/B's.
> >
> > Bob
>
> I guess certain wires on the MU cable control the
> dynamics. Maybe it is a false memory, but I seem
> to recall a cab ride on the N&W back during that
> time period where we had a similar unit in the
> consist. The engineer was complaining that the
> dynamics did not pass through. I think his
> statement was coupled with a remark about the
> idiots at SOC. Wabash did not use dynamics. Was
> Wabash cheap enough to leave a few wires out?
> Probably.
>
> Jack

ATSF100WEST Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> That N&W engineer may have been dealing with an
> ex-Wabash "original" GP7. They were ordered
> without M.U. but it was added later by the Decatur
> shops. They also added nose M.U. to their F7's
> there. That said, I can't opine as to whether
> Wabash abandoned "recommended practice" by
> omitting the cabling for D/B controls (leaving
> dummy male terminals). Anything that came stock
> from E.M.D. had "pass-through" cabling for all
> locomotive features. The consist that Roger shot
> and Marty shared here - with GP35 1307 - obviously
> had "pass-through" capability; otherwise, they
> would have put the SD45's in the second and third
> position, and left the 1307 as the trailing unit.
> "Hot Water" (Jack) here on T.O. could shed some
> more light on the subject - as he was an E.M.D.
> Field Service Engineer.
>
> Bob

Thanks Bob. It probably was a ex-Wabash GP7. I agree that the Santa Fe crew probably would not have gone far without dynamics on at least the three "Big Jacks".