Canadian Railroads > MLW Monday-New & Shiny

November 11, 1973, and I'm visiting family in Edmonton when long time friend and railfan Clayton Jones calls. Two new BCR M630-W's are being delivered by the CN and will be in town shortly. After Clayton picks me up, its off to East Edmonton where we catch BCR 723-724 as a set out is made before this train re-couples and heads into Calder. So here is how these units looked, nice and fresh. Richard Yaremko 

---

Nice one Richard

Here is how they looked near the end of their service on BCR...
Note all of the changes:

1) Ditch lights added
2) Filters on the long hood
3) Fuel tank heater removed
4) Plow modified
5) Cab Steps changed
6) Horn arrangement

BCR M630W 730 and C-425 812 at Whistler. 4/89

Brian E



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/25/16 10:53 by m420.

---

Maybe it is just "railfan legend", but why were these units disliked by the crews?

Hi Brian:

I prefer "as delivered" to the ugliness of BC RAIL.:)-

RY


m420 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Nice one Richard
>
> Here is how they looked near the end of their
> service on BCR...
> Note all of the changes:
>
> 1) Ditch lights added
> 2) Filters on the long hood
> 3) Fuel tank heater removed
> 4) Plow modified
> 5) Cab Steps changed
> 6) Horn arrangement
>
> BCR M630W 730 and C-425 812 at Whistler. 4/89
>
> Brian E

NYSWSD70M Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Maybe it is just "railfan legend", but why were
> these units disliked by the crews?

The units were quite prone to wheelslips on heavy grade and or poor rail conditions.  Also they had an awful sway, rock and roll. The M420 units had the same issues and either type of locomotive was not liked by the crews.  Doug

hoggerdoug Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> NYSWSD70M Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Maybe it is just "railfan legend", but why were
> > these units disliked by the crews?
>
> The units were quite prone to wheelslips on heavy
> grade and or poor rail conditions.  Also they
> had an awful sway, rock and roll. The M420 units
> had the same issues and either type of locomotive
> was not liked by the crews.  Doug

Was the wheelslip a reflection of the cab or just coincidence?  I could see the cab influencing slip if it made the units unbalanced.

hoggerdoug Wrote:

> The units were quite prone to wheelslips on heavy
> grade and or poor rail conditions.  Also they
> had an awful sway, rock and roll. The M420 units
> had the same issues and either type of locomotive
> was not liked by the crews.  Doug


Hi Doug:

While I certainly heard enough crews complain about the 630W's, I rarely heard similar complaints about the M420's - especially up on the northern lines.

Brian E

 

 arwye said:
Hi Brian:

I prefer "as delivered" to the ugliness of BC RAIL.:)-

RY


Yes, I know, Richard!!
(-:

Brian E

Is CN actually running the BC units, or is the Blackwidow SD40 hauling the works?

NYSWSD70M Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> hoggerdoug Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > NYSWSD70M Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Maybe it is just "railfan legend", but why
> were
> > > these units disliked by the crews?
> >
> > The units were quite prone to wheelslips on
> heavy
> > grade and or poor rail conditions.  Also they
> > had an awful sway, rock and roll. The M420
> units
> > had the same issues and either type of
> locomotive
> > was not liked by the crews.  Doug
>
> Was the wheelslip a reflection of the cab or just
> coincidence?  I could see the cab influencing
> slip if it made the units unbalanced.

No, I don't think the "rock N roll" had any affect or influence on the wheel slip issues, perhaps a poor setup with the traction motors and wheel slip sensor system. Crews did not like them leading because of the sway and rocking, the M420's also had a sway and rock motion that the crews on the southend of BC Rail did not want them leading. Then again, crews on the north end complained of vibration issues with the first batch of Dash 9 units whereas crews on the southend (Prince George south) did not have any complaints with the units leading. Further, with some humor, after riding the GE units, in my humble opinion the SD40's we had on BCR were the worst for cab noise and vibration. That is my opinion and personal experiences.  Thank you for your interest in this posting.     Doug

hoggerdoug Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> NYSWSD70M Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > hoggerdoug Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > NYSWSD70M Wrote:
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > > -----
> > > > Maybe it is just "railfan legend", but why
> > were
> > > > these units disliked by the crews?
> > >
> > > The units were quite prone to wheelslips on
> > heavy
> > > grade and or poor rail conditions.  Also
> they
> > > had an awful sway, rock and roll. The M420
> > units
> > > had the same issues and either type of
> > locomotive
> > > was not liked by the crews.  Doug
> >
> > Was the wheelslip a reflection of the cab or
> just
> > coincidence?  I could see the cab influencing
> > slip if it made the units unbalanced.
>
> No, I don't think the "rock N roll" had any affect
> or influence on the wheel slip issues, perhaps a
> poor setup with the traction motors and wheel slip
> sensor system. Crews did not like them leading
> because of the sway and rocking, the M420's also
> had a sway and rock motion that the crews on the
> southend of BC Rail did not want them leading.
> Then again, crews on the north end complained of
> vibration issues with the first batch of Dash 9
> units whereas crews on the southend (Prince George
> south) did not have any complaints with the units
> leading. Further, with some humor, after riding
> the GE units, in my humble opinion the SD40's we
> had on BCR were the worst for cab noise and
> vibration. That is my opinion and personal
> experiences.  Thank you for your interest in
> this posting.     Doug

Thank YOU for the info!  Very interesting!

Same Province, different railways.  CP engineers in Cranbrook, Nelson and Penticton didn't like CLC/FM C-Liner cabs leading, and would sometimes switch out the power to have an H-liner in the lead.  The unit on the train order clearance just had to be in the consist, with number boards lit to be legal.

By comparison, CN engineers liked to have GMD F's in the lead on freight trains, which were supposed to do better with rock slides than hood units.

More recently, CP SD40-2F's were unpopular because the had substandard seats.

All three units were working. RY

zartok-35 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Is CN actually running the BC units, or is the
> Blackwidow SD40 hauling the works?