Eastern Railroad Discussion > NS F Units Retirement?

With pictures of NS 8099 leading the NS OCS flooding my Facebook feed, people are saying that some new VP is retiring the F Units because "they cost too much to operate". I need answers and the truth as I don't trust Facebook unless it's officialy from the railroad itself, like the new CP heritage units.

Posted from Android

I have no idea whether it's true or not. But I will say that these things run in cycles. 

I got some text messages from my son concerning this as well.  To be honest, I don't expect an announcement from the railroad saying they aren't using the F engines anymore.  

I would say to check Altoona Works and NS Dash 9.  They have a website in addition to a Facebook page.  If the Fs are moved into storage, they will document it.

ctillnc Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have no idea whether it's true or not. But I
> will say that these things run in cycles. 

Cycles as in they're in for Maintenance and Inspection and just using other power in the meantime?

Posted from Android

I think he means cycles as in rumors start with no facts to back them up.  Railfans get all upset and whether true or not nobody waits for an official word  to back up their claim.  Just like the rumor about Jersey Central being painted black earlier this year and DC/AC 4001  being painted black.  Both were done back to original and I'm especially glad of 4001 being done this way.

NS has a new VP  of operations and equipment maintenance.  Perhaps he has different ideas about the Fs than the previous guy

Obviously the F's are not cheap to run and maintain. 

Corrrect me if I'm wrong here but everytime the F's are used for a "business" trip or "shipper" tour or any other time, isn't it a business expense?

The fine accountants at NS (along with KCS, UP, CP, etc.) should be able to write off the expense as a cost of doing business and/or needs.  
The same should hold true when the accounting dept.takes depreciation on the F's (and probably ever passenger car) on a yearly basis. 

 

Aren’t they basically GP38-2s in a cooler body now? Do they really cost that much more to maintain then a standard unit? 

My point of view is that for what they spent to aquire, overhaul, modify, re-modify and maintain the units over the years, and knowing that they would not likely command huge dollars on the second hand market, it makes more financial sense to continue using the F units and get some kind of return out of them than to just park them or sell them.  Pulling freight units out of the pool and cleaning them up good enough for the job comes at a cost too. If this is indeed the end of the F units, it smacks of a new guy trying to put his personal stamp on his department and show who's in charge, whether the decision makes any particular sense or not.  If I were looking at things from a cost cutting standpoint, I would sooner question all of those office cars they have instead of what pulls them.

overniteman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Obviously the F's are not cheap to run and
> maintain. 
>
>

Why would they be? NS spent a fortune on them putting 710 engines in and a lot of other modernizing. I doubt they’re much more expensive than any other locomotive to operate. The capital investment was probably a different story, but that has already been spent.

Posted from iPhone

I like the F Units, and I hope they remain in service for some time, but it seems to me that if NS wanted to replace the F Units with freight locomotives, they should do it with some class and repaint 10 or so of their units in Tuscan and Gold to match the train.  They could use them in freight service until needed for an OCS move.  Simply route a couple of them to Altonna, give them the spa treatment and send them on their way at the head end of the OCS.  

Minor correction-- the units were rebuilt with 645 powerplants, not 710s.  There isn't a non-turbo variant of the 710, and you can really get a good listen to the classic non-turbo 645 chug in this video:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNhj8gTtewM

The only "strike" I can see against these units is they are an asset that otherwise sits around when not in use, and they see action roughly once a quarter.   A numbercruncher would see that as a liability, rather than an asset.  Otherwise, I agree completely with what you say below.

F7sForever Wrote:

>
> Why would they be? NS spent a fortune on them
> putting 710 engines in and a lot of other
> modernizing. I doubt they’re much more expensive
> than any other locomotive to operate. The capital
> investment was probably a different story, but
> that has already been spent.
>
 

If you think maintening these F units is expensive, just think about how much their passenger cars are to maintain!
 

> The fine accountants at NS (along with KCS, UP,
> CP, etc.) should be able to write off the expense
> as a cost of doing business and/or needs.  
> The same should hold true when the accounting
> dept.takes depreciation on the F's (and probably
> ever passenger car) on a yearly basis. 

That's true, but in terms of operating P&L as reported under GAAP, an expense is an expense. You can get into a lengthy discussion of the implications on taxes payable and of depreciation on after-tax cash flow, but in general a profitable company cannot make an expense just go away. 

To illustrate what I meant by "cycles" in my earlier post, just look at the NS steam program. Alive and well under Claytor, McKinnon at least tolerated it, Goode saw no point in it and killed it (and plowed salt into the earth), then revived in a lesser form by Moorman, then cut back by Squires. Which way will the wind blow next?  



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/17/19 09:46 by ctillnc.

Friend at Juniata said they are just being worked on and the Southern unit was requested as a fill in since it was going to Atlanta, at least that is the story there.   

My favorite part of the original post is "I need answers and the truth"

Are you the CEO of the NS LOL!?

My barber told me the F Units are to be parked and gutted and turned into Hot Dog Stands. There you go, you have your answers!

Bruce

ShortlinesUSA Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> The only "strike" I can see against these units is
> they are an asset that otherwise sits around when
> not in use, and they see action roughly once a
> quarter.   A numbercruncher would see that as a
> liability, rather than an asset.  Otherwise, I
> agree completely with what you say below.
>

After Southern stopped operating the Southern Crescent and the Piedmont  they kept some of the FP7s for special trains. When they weren't being used on specials, they were used to haul ballast trains for the Maintenance of Way Department. 

brfriedm Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> My favorite part of the original post is "I need
> answers and the truth"
>
> Are you the CEO of the NS LOL!?
>
> My barber told me the F Units are to be parked and
> gutted and turned into Hot Dog Stands. There you
> go, you have your answers!

I hear HEP units make excellent espresso makers ...

Posted from Android

HEP is also useful when there's a power failure.

Every home should have its own F7, GP40-2, etc

Posted from Android

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> HEP is also useful when there's a power failure.
>
> Every home should have its own F7, GP40-2, etc

Except freight locomotives can NOT provide HEP, i.e. 480 volts, three phase AC at 60 HZ, without a LOT of work.