Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and the Yahoo Answers website is now in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.

For embarrassed locomotive engineers...?

1) if the sd40 is todays 'rambler' of locomotives, then what was the 1st generations most embarrassing loco? (bl2 for instance)

2) what do you think tommarows most embarrassing locomotive will be? ( a 90mac, or a ge perhaps?)

3) whats your take on the sd45 series? were they harder workers than the 40 series, or just wishful thinking?

4) if we picked the most embarrassing loco of the first gen., what would you say would be your prime choice to operate from the first gen.?

as always, thanks for sharing!

Update:

Edit: for those who dont do much readin, this is in response to a previous posting from a real engineer who found himself operating an sd40 of rather suspect means. personally, gm never made an ugly locomotive, nor a bad one. id take an sd45x any day!

Update 2:

Decision: some very distinctive answers. though, gonna have to seperate Andy and Samurai as their answers were alike.... both thumbs up for gm, 45s and 9s. thumbs down for uboats. tough choice so ill go with Derail as the tie breaker this time.

7 Answers

Relevance
  • Derail
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    I have only seen the BL-2 in photos, but Wow, is that thing ever ugly, LOL. A few years ago, due to a snafu in motive power availability, I had to run the local "Industry Job" using an old SW-8 that was normally reserved for hostling around the engine house. It rode like a lumber wagon. And it was about half the size of any one of the cars I was pulling. Dam thing belongs in an amusement park.

    I don't mind getting stuck with one or two old Geep 7s or 9s. They're very responsive and you can really feel what the train is doing behind you. Geep 35s are much better though - simply for the power. That was mostly a tongue-in-cheek post I put up before. But the hint of truth matter behind it is, when you're out "barkin' with the big dogs" pulling a 12,400 ton train, I really didn't want an old dirty SD-40 as the lead unit with a plume of exhaust that would lead people to think it burned coal. Actually that situation just became our joke of the day.

    Source(s): Engineer
  • 1 decade ago

    1. I’m not so sure that the SD40 was a Rambler. In fact, the SD40s and 45s were at the top of the locomotive heap for nearly three decades. But to my mind, the Rambler, Edsel and Yugo of the day were rolled up in a big ball with the introduction of ANY of the GE U-boats, the EMD SD contemporaries.

    2. Any of the GE U-boats.

    3. See answer to #1 and #2.

    4. Again, not a Rambler at all, but the locos I enjoyed to run the most was the SD9 with a 24RL brake schedule. The best local and road switcher power I’ve known. Pulled great, no short time rating and their ride was extremely smooth, which garnered them the moniker of “Cadillac.”

    I would argue all of todays locomotives will seem primative, as the last generation to be propelled by diesel fuel, and sooner than later.

  • Andy
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    Nothing made by EMD was the rambler of locomotives.That honor would have to go to the GE "U Boats" like the U 25.They were horrible engines in my opinion.I've never been on a BL 2.Tomorrows locomotive to me would probably be an SD90MAC or even an SD70M. We have a lot of SD70M's and they aren't a very good engine when compared to a GE C45.The SD70 Has one very annoying habit that seems to be common to many of them(not all of them though).When you go into dynamic brake they don't load.So you keep advancing the dynamic and all of the sudden they surge and cause a run in of the slack.The SD45 was a good engine but very similar to a 40.As for my choice to run it would be an SD45 i guess or an SD9.The SD9 was a great riding engine for an old dinosaur.We have very few of them left around here.On the line i run 95% of our power is SD70's and C44 and 45's.The C45 AC's are the best engines i've ever run.

    Source(s): UPRR engineer
  • AJ
    Lv 4
    1 decade ago

    For question 1, I would have to say a GP7 or GP9. E.M.D. manufactured almost 2,000 of the GP9's. It wasn't really an "embarrassment" though.

    For question 2 I think the most embarrassing locomotive of tomorrow will be your suggestion with the SD90/43MAC. Although I don't like E.M.D locomotives just because of their trucks and their cabs, I like the SD90 the best. I love its highly distinctive configuration of headlights on its cab.

    For question 3, I have only been into trains for 3 1/2 years so I have never seen an SD45 in action especially where I live. I live in a city with ALL GP40-2's for power that are hard to catch. And if I go to the city ahead of me, Janesville, it's GP38, GP40-2 again, SD40-2, MP15AC/DC, and GP15-1's.

    I'm not an engineer so I have no clue on the last one.

  • 1 decade ago

    Didn't know there was such a thing as an embarrassed engineer. Most that I know are rather proud of their locomotive regardless if it's an odd looking machine or an underachiever. Embarrassment and mortification are mostly in ones own mind. Old, ugly, slow.....they all deserve respect and love, even the less than stellar ones. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder! What kind of rail "fan" focuses on the shame or inadequacies of our impressive workhorses anyway? Suppose that's why your just a fan and not an engineer.

  • Ed Fox
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    Never known any locomotive engineer think his locomotive is "embarrassing". Seems to be something you thought up all by yourself

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    .

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.