Eastern Railroad Discussion > Florida East Coast SD70M-2

FEC years ago used to operate five SD70M-2s in a red white and blue scheme but they were either returned to Lessor or placed in storage.  I've see photos of them sitting together in Illinois as recent as mid-August 2020.  My questions include where are they now and who owns them?  They aren't that old that they can't be leased out or sold yet sit rusting away.  Any updates?  Thanks in advance.  They are FEC #103 - 107.  

Yes here is the current status of 4 of this group.
The 105 and 107 have been sold or leased to Florida Gulf Coast & Atlantic and are running basically in full FEC paint with just a new reporting mark.  

 The 104 and 106 are still at Metro East Industries in East St Louis, IL as of today. They are owned by First Union Rail / FURX. See attached photo of FEC # 106 from Nov 2nd 2021.
                                                Mark Mautner

---

bnsf6606 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> FEC years ago used to operate five SD70M-2s in a
> red white and blue scheme but they were either
> returned to Lessor or placed in storage.  I've
> see photos of them sitting together in Illinois as
> recent as mid-August 2020.  My questions include
> where are they now and who owns them?  They
> aren't that old that they can't be leased out or
> sold yet sit rusting away.  Any updates?  Thanks
> in advance.  They are FEC #103 - 107.

Only FEC104-107 wore the red/white/blue scheme associated with RailAmerica. Although FEC never was formally part of RailAmerica, both FEC and RailAmerica were owned by Fortress Investments and several of those engines had RA heralds as well as Florida East Coast lettering.

I can only guess that the FEC104-107, which were indeed returned to the lessor, struggled to find new homes because railroads in need of high-horsepower road locomotives now favor AC traction. Norfolk Southern's much larger SD70M-2 fleet also had very short service lives. (I was not aware that two are now in service on Florida Gulf & Atlantic.)

The four earlier FEC SD70M-2s, FEC100-103, were delivered in a blue/gold scheme that matched the Alaska Railroad's colors. Like the newer quartet, they were sidelined after FEC acquired its current mainline fleet of GE locomotives, but they were then sold, two apiece, to Vermont Railway and Providence & Worcester. The P&W ones were quickly shipped off to other Genesee & Wyoming properties after G&W bought P&W. As far as I know, the VTR untis are still there and still in service.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/03/21 19:23 by toledopatch.

Garbage units.

The RA SD70M-2s didn't fit in with FEC's paint at the time, but I always like the red, white and blue, especially if there was a matching pair together.

106 in happier times:

12/28/2009 Jacksonville, FL with train 101, note with the as delivered RA nose herald.
5/14/2014 Fort Lauderdale with train 121, now minus the nose herald.
7/11/2014 St. Augustine with train 210

Cooper
 

---

---

---

Way more interesting than the LNG GEVOs... Such a shame they were junk...

what did the crews not like about the sd70m-2's?

66

The SD70M-2's have six DC traction motors so their performance is not as robust as that of a unit outfitted with six AC traction motors.
In 2014, about midway in James Hertwig's 7.5 years as president, FEC made a long-term business investment
by acquiring twenty-four GE ES44C4 units. These units have AC traction but only four traction motors.
Importantly, the performance of four motor units is degraded from that of six motor units; so FEC's goals are unclear.
The eleven leased SD70M-2's were then returned to their owners after arrival of the GE's.
I would really like to know the real financial impact that resulted from this transaction; however,
that will not happen because the information is confidential.
ALLEN :)

The ES44C4 units seem to be in constant use on Florida East Coast. With the minimal grades, track speed doesn't seem to be a problem.

It is likely that GE and natural gas interests may have helped with the purchase. Pipeline connections at Bowden went in at the same time.

Posted from Android

Thanks for the update.  I appreciate it.  

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The ES44C4 units seem to be in constant use on
> Florida East Coast. With the minimal grades, track
> speed doesn't seem to be a problem.
>
> It is likely that GE and natural gas interests may
> have helped with the purchase. Pipeline
> connections at Bowden went in at the same time.
>
> Posted from Android

Saying C4's work fine is like saying six motor DC works fine because they perform similarly.
Unless it can be otherwise proven, it appears only GE and natural gas interests actually benefitted from this transaction.
By the way, I would not hire James Hertwig to run my Lionel train.
ALLEN :)

 

FWIW, I heard the GE financing along with with the dual fuel concept were the factors that tipped the scales in GE's favor for the ES44C4 order.  Also, GECX 3000 was supposedly on loan, free of charge, to FEC while the bugs were worked out.  It could not lead, but it was a fairly common sight.

GECX 12/24/2016 St. Augustine, trailing on 226.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/04/21 09:47 by SOU3921.

---

           Not garbage units at all. Simply no longer needed as everybody and their brother in the railroad business has way more engines than they need with plenty of their own setting, waiting for a recall to work.

krm152 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Lackawanna484 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The ES44C4 units seem to be in constant use on
> > Florida East Coast. With the minimal grades,
> track
> > speed doesn't seem to be a problem.
> >
> > It is likely that GE and natural gas interests
> may
> > have helped with the purchase. Pipeline
> > connections at Bowden went in at the same time.
> >
> > Posted from Android
>
> Saying C4's work fine is like saying six motor DC
> works fine because they perform similarly.
> Unless it can be otherwise proven, it appears only
> GE and natural gas interests actually benefitted
> from this transaction.
> By the way, I would not hire James Hertwig to run
> my Lionel train.
> ALLEN :)
>
>  

I was careful to say the C4 works fine ON THE FLORIDA EAST COAST. Right there, in the quote.

No inference as to how they work anywhere else, with different ruling grades, etc.

krm152 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
____________________________________

krm152 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Lackawanna484 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The ES44C4 units seem to be in constant use on
> > Florida East Coast. With the minimal grades,
> track
> > speed doesn't seem to be a problem.
> >
> > It is likely that GE and natural gas interests
> may
> > have helped with the purchase. Pipeline
> > connections at Bowden went in at the same time.
> >
> > Posted from Android
>
> Saying C4's work fine is like saying six motor DC
> works fine because they perform similarly.
> Unless it can be otherwise proven, it appears only
> GE and natural gas interests actually benefitted
> from this transaction.
> By the way, I would not hire James Hertwig to run
> my Lionel train.
> ALLEN
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>>I was careful to say the C4 works fine ON THE FLORIDA
>>EAST COAST. Right there, in the quote.
>
>>No inference as to how they work anywhere else, with
>>different ruling grades, etc.


You essentially attempted to dismiss my comments by rebutting a comment I did not make. This is a trick I ran into many times during my audit career.

My comments were:
The performance of a C4 is about the same as a six motor DC traction unit. Therefore, the C4’s did not really improve locomotive performance on the FEC.
Unless proven otherwise, it appears GE and natural gas suppliers were the beneficiaries of the transaction.
I stand by these comments unless you can prove they are incorrect.
ALLEN

krm152 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> krm152 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> Lackawanna484 Wrote:
> ____________________________________
>
> krm152 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Lackawanna484 Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > The ES44C4 units seem to be in constant use
> on
> > > Florida East Coast. With the minimal grades,
> > track
> > > speed doesn't seem to be a problem.
> > >
> > > It is likely that GE and natural gas
> interests
> > may
> > > have helped with the purchase. Pipeline
> > > connections at Bowden went in at the same
> time.
> > >
> > > Posted from Android
> >
> > Saying C4's work fine is like saying six motor
> DC
> > works fine because they perform similarly.
> > Unless it can be otherwise proven, it appears
> only
> > GE and natural gas interests actually
> benefitted
> > from this transaction.
> > By the way, I would not hire James Hertwig to
> run
> > my Lionel train.
> > ALLEN
> >
> >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> >>I was careful to say the C4 works fine ON THE
> FLORIDA
> >>EAST COAST. Right there, in the quote.
> >
> >>No inference as to how they work anywhere else,
> with
> >>different ruling grades, etc.
>
>
> You essentially attempted to dismiss my comments
> by rebutting a comment I did not make. This is a
> trick I ran into many times during my audit
> career.
>
> My comments were:
> The performance of a C4 is about the same as a six
> motor DC traction unit. Therefore, the C4’s did
> not really improve locomotive performance on the
> FEC.
> Unless proven otherwise, it appears GE and natural
> gas suppliers were the beneficiaries of the
> transaction.
> I stand by these comments unless you can prove
> they are incorrect.
> ALLEN

No argument that GE and the natural gas interests were among the beneficiaries.

FEC received locomotives which do the job required, at a good price. No inference was made this would replicate as well on other lines. That is clearly expressed in the text.

I've made my points. By introducing an observation unrelated to the FEC you created a straw man, and then (correctly) demolished it.

krm152 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------


> > Unless it can be otherwise proven, it appears
> only
> > GE and natural gas interests actually
> benefitted
> > from this transaction.


I would say FEC's crews are benefiting from operating a locomotive that won't rattle their fillings out.  

Typhoon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> krm152 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
>
> > > Unless it can be otherwise proven, it appears
> > only
> > > GE and natural gas interests actually
> > benefitted
> > > from this transaction.
>
>
> I would say FEC's crews are benefiting from
> operating a locomotive that won't rattle their
> fillings out.  

Take another look, the one pictured had an I cab.

Posted from Android

goneon66 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> what did the crews not like about the sd70m-2's?
>
> 66


Wheel slippage, dynamic brake failures, software malfunctions, the cabs rattled/sounded like you were in a tank, etc.

Speaking for the NS ones....

Posted from Android

thanks for the info............

66