Home Open Account Help 231 users online

Passenger Trains > Chicago Metra F40C's


Pages:  [ 1 ][ 2 ] [ Next ]
Current Page:1 of 2


Date: 11/27/22 21:37
Chicago Metra F40C's
Author: srman

Are these still on the roster and are they running?



Date: 11/27/22 21:51
Re: Chicago Metra F40C's
Author: pdt

diesel shop says only 611 and 614 still on the roster.  No word if they are active or stored



Date: 11/27/22 22:39
Re: Chicago Metra F40C's
Author: SpringedSwitch

Very much stored and not operational.



Date: 11/28/22 15:40
Re: Chicago Metra F40C's
Author: Peak45068

Metra engines 150-172 are next for the chop. Ride those UP based examples while you can. Seven of that batch heave already been stored.

Englishman in America

Posted from iPhone



Date: 11/28/22 16:28
Re: Chicago Metra F40C's
Author: SpringedSwitch

Peak45068 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Metra engines 150-172 are next for the chop. Ride
> those UP based examples while you can. Seven of
> that batch heave already been stored.

Typical. They buy other people's used junk and then scrap engines they've owned since they were new.



Date: 11/28/22 17:02
Re: Chicago Metra F40C's
Author: joemvcnj

What are the differences between the F40C, the old Santa Fe FP45, and the Amtrak SDP45F  ? 
Why did only the latter have a propensity to derail ? 



Date: 11/28/22 17:07
Re: Chicago Metra F40C's
Author: SpringedSwitch

joemvcnj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What are the differences between the F40C, the old
> Santa Fe FP45, and the Amtrak SDP45F  ? 
> Why did only the latter have a propensity to
> derail ? 

The F40C had HEP instead of a top heavy steam generator and the Santa Fe had relatively decent track for their FP45s.
 



Date: 11/28/22 17:17
Re: Chicago Metra F40C's
Author: dan

trucks the same?



Date: 11/28/22 18:02
Re: Chicago Metra F40C's
Author: pdt

I believe that the F45 and FP45's had flexicoil trucks,   the SDP45F HT-C.

Im no expert on  this but IIRC, the SDP45F's HTC trucks were stiffer,  and they engines would spread the rails at speed.

I think the F40C's had flexicoil trucks too.      Someone who knows more can chime in



Date: 11/28/22 18:59
Re: Chicago Metra F40C's
Author: Typhoon

joemvcnj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What are the differences between the F40C, the old
> Santa Fe FP45, and the Amtrak SDP45F  ? 

The Amtrak "SDP45F" didn't exist?

 



Date: 11/28/22 19:51
Re: Chicago Metra F40C's
Author: RuleG

SpringedSwitch Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> joemvcnj Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > What are the differences between the F40C, the
> old
> > Santa Fe FP45, and the Amtrak SDP45F  ? 
> > Why did only the latter have a propensity to
> > derail ? 
>
> The F40C had HEP instead of a top heavy steam
> generator and the Santa Fe had relatively decent
> track for their FP45s.
>  
The Milwaukee Road was the other railroad which owned FP45s.  I believe that Metra's F40C's operated on ex-Milwaukee Road lines.  Thus, if the Milwaukee Road's FP45s tracked well, then I would think the F40C would have performed just as well.



Date: 11/29/22 02:29
Re: Chicago Metra F40C's
Author: joemvcnj

Typhoon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> joemvcnj Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > What are the differences between the F40C, the
> old
> > Santa Fe FP45, and the Amtrak SDP45F  ? 
>
> The Amtrak "SDP45F" didn't exist?
>
>  
I meant SDP40F.

Posted from Android



Date: 11/29/22 05:47
Re: Chicago Metra F40C's
Author: MitchGDRMCo

SDP40Fs had HTCs.



Date: 11/29/22 07:17
Re: Chicago Metra F40C's
Author: HotWater

Typhoon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> joemvcnj Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > What are the differences between the F40C, the
> old
> > Santa Fe FP45, and the Amtrak SDP45F  ? 
>
> The Amtrak "SDP45F" didn't exist?

While never ordered by Amtrak, EMD did indeed "bid" both, i.e. SDP40F and SDP45F, thus the SDP45F existed on paper.



Date: 11/29/22 07:19
Re: Chicago Metra F40C's
Author: HotWater

pdt Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I believe that the F45 and FP45's had flexicoil
> trucks,   the SDP45F HT-C.
>
> Im no expert on  this but IIRC, the SDP45F's HTC
> trucks were stiffer,  and they engines would
> spread the rails at speed.


WRONG!!!!!


> I think the F40C's had flexicoil trucks
> too.      Someone who knows more can chime in



Date: 11/29/22 17:23
Re: Chicago Metra F40C's
Author: NYSWSD70M

pdt Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I believe that the F45 and FP45's had flexicoil
> trucks,   the SDP45F HT-C.
>
> Im no expert on  this but IIRC, the SDP45F's HTC
> trucks were stiffer,  and they engines would
> spread the rails at speed.
>
> I think the F40C's had flexicoil trucks
> too.      Someone who knows more can chime in

The FRA was just starting to set the standards for track conditions and speed. Thus the railroads set both and standards varried widely. The SDP40F did not have an issue were the track was truly up to the task. It was particularly apparent on the BN where "60 mph track" was clearly not up to the the same standard as ATSF, SP and UP's track, just to name three examples.

While the F40PH proved to be more versatile, the original plan to have "skid" mounted stand alone HEP plants in SDP40F's would have worked well on the long distance trains. The prime mover would have been able to devote it's entire output to train handling and the carried more fuel. The separate HEP plants were later used to great success by EMD, MK and Conrail/Altoona for commuter units.

Posted from Android



Date: 11/29/22 17:38
Re: Chicago Metra F40C's
Author: SpringedSwitch

NYSWSD70M Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> pdt Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I believe that the F45 and FP45's had flexicoil
> > trucks,   the SDP45F HT-C.
> >
> > Im no expert on  this but IIRC, the SDP45F's
> HTC
> > trucks were stiffer,  and they engines would
> > spread the rails at speed.
> >
> > I think the F40C's had flexicoil trucks
> > too.      Someone who knows more can chime
> in
>
> The FRA was just starting to set the standards for
> track conditions and speed. Thus the railroads
> set both and standards varried widely. The SDP40F
> did not have an issue were the track was truly up
> to the task. It was particularly apparent on the
> BN where "60 mph track" was clearly not up to the
> the same standard as ATSF, SP and UP's track, just
> to name three examples.
>
> While the F40PH proved to be more versatile, the
> original plan to have "skid" mounted stand alone
> HEP plants in SDP40F's would have worked well on
> the long distance trains. The prime mover would
> have been able to devote it's entire output to
> train handling and the carried more fuel. The
> separate HEP plants were later used to great
> success by EMD, MK and Conrail/Altoona for
> commuter units.

How many SDP40Fs had HEP? I thought they were delivered with steam heat and just a handful converted to HEP.



Date: 11/30/22 11:06
Re: Chicago Metra F40C's
Author: joemvcnj

Could the SDP40F been retrofiited with flexicoil trucks ? 



Date: 11/30/22 11:16
Re: Chicago Metra F40C's
Author: HotWater

joemvcnj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Could the SDP40F been retrofiited with flexicoil
> trucks ? 

No, and why would anyone want to?



Date: 11/30/22 11:44
Re: Chicago Metra F40C's
Author: ctillnc

I wonder if any single topic on Trainorders has generated as many posts as the SDP40F.



Pages:  [ 1 ][ 2 ] [ Next ]
Current Page:1 of 2


[ Share Thread on Facebook ] [ Search ] [ Start a New Thread ] [ Back to Thread List ] [ <Newer ] [ Older> ] 
Page created in 0.0884 seconds