Tonnage Ratings and Weather Reductions for Locomotives
NW Mailing List
nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org
Mon Dec 17 09:32:13 EST 2018
Good afternoon from the UK,
If memory serves CP used to have operational guidance/rules/notes for train weights on various sections across the network.
The problem with train ratings was that the mix of diesel power led to odd combinations of power ratings and tractive effort so one type could be working optimally whilst another was under performing. This was not just a technical and operational issue but also has an impact on the overall train economics. Attempts were made to assign traction to routes or sections where they would work to best advantage. Often this was compromised by technical and operational issues so trains would operate with a mix of power on the head end. SD-40s seemed better placed for the mountainous territory in the Rockies. MLW/Alco locos seemed to be better suited to the flatter sections. This was all before ac traction technology arrived.
From: NW-Mailing-List [mailto:nw-mailing-list-bounces at nwhs.org] On Behalf Of NW Mailing List
Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2018 7:50 PM
To: NW Mailing List
Subject: Re: Tonnage Ratings and Weather Reductions for Locomotives
On 12/16/2018 1:48 PM, NW Mailing List via NW-Mailing-List wrote:
In a study made,
there was one coal train, with pushers, routed to the Shenandoah
Division that was 1800 tons over the limit. Harry Bundy
I had one about 3000 tons over one time. It was slow going up the hills, but, we made without any damage. We must have had some pretty good power that trip! When I stepped into the yard office in Shenandoah, the clerk asked me if I knew how much tonnage we had?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the NW-Mailing-List