Pushers through Salem Westbound

CAT345C · Unread post by **CAT345C** » Mon Feb 12, 2007 7:59 pm

chicago4900 wrote:What time of day was this at? I could have sworn those two locomotives were in Rougemere today sitting with a coke train.

Thats cuz K352 gave them a shove, way over kill if you ask me.

GP30M4216 · Unread post by **GP30M4216** » Tue Feb 13, 2007 12:31 am

Central Michigan sits atop a higher plateau than the surrounding Great Lakes (obviously), and thus, any mainline crossing the state must go through this risen area. CSX seems to have found some of the most hilly places to try to ascend or descend from the mid-state high to the coastal low. West of Plymouth, trains must ascend Salem Hill going west, and then continue their climb up the less steep hill at Green Oak. This get them out of the Lake St. Clair valley. On the west side of the state, CSX train heading east must climb out of the Lake Michigan valley at Saugatuck Hill between Grand Junction and Holland. I don't know the exact gradient percents, but i bet someone knows and can post them for Salem Hill and Saugatuck hill.

TrainWatcher · Unread post by **TrainWatcher** » Tue Feb 13, 2007 7:09 am

Now, here is another question.....

Could a pair of GEVO's pull the train? I have seen more of those than Geeps lately.... I do know that Saline Hill is I think a 1% (please correct me if I am wrong). Basically, I see that a pair of GEVO's could do well and pull the train to track speed up the hill.....

J T · Unread post by **J T** » Tue Feb 13, 2007 8:38 am

GP30M4216 wrote:CSX seems to have found some of the most hilly places to try to ascend or descend from the mid-state high to the coastal low.

CSX? These lines have been in existence since the 1800's. Or did I misread what you meant?

Unread post by **~Z~** » Tue Feb 13, 2007 8:48 am

J T wrote:
GP30M4216 wrote:CSX seems to have found some of the most hilly places to try to ascend or descend from the mid-state high to the coastal low.
CSX? These lines have been in existence since the 1800's. Or did I misread what you meant?

I think he means "the former companies that have now become CSX"

csxt4617 · Unread post by **csxt4617** » Tue Feb 13, 2007 11:42 am

Railfan James wrote:Why was geep #8637 on N903 running backwards? Did not think they could do that unless it was a small yard job or a shorter local due to safety concerns?

I don't think there's anything that prohibits it. It's just that most 6 axles (which is what 8637 is, an SD50, not a geep

) on CSX don't have ditchlights on the rear, so if they're running long-hood forward, they can only do 20MPH across grade crossings. Makes for some slow running. Most engines assigned to local service (GP38-2's, GP40-2's, etc) have them on both ends, so this isn't a problem for locals.

GP30M4216 · Unread post by **GP30M4216** » Tue Feb 13, 2007 12:31 pm

Yes JT, I meant that of all the railroads currently operating cross-state, CSX seems to have one of the hillyest (?

) alignments thanks to the route their predecessors gave them in the 1870s and 1880s.

As to a pair of ES44DCs taking the train up the hill, each one has 4400hp, so you'd have 8800hp at the head end if you had only two of them. A lot of it depends on the conditions below the hill in Plymouth. I've heard Q327 argue with the RN dispatcher about going from the WB main on the Detroit Sub to the mainline heading west from Plymouth at Levan rather than at Hines Park, because if they were to cross at Hines Park "we'd never make it up the hill. I don't care what the computer is telling you, I'm telling to we will stall somewhere on that hill if we can't cross over sooner to get our speed up." (to the RN from the Q327 crew). And this is a train with a straight shot over the diamond! Imagine a lengthy Q335 or coal train being held below Lilley Road at the south end of Plymouth on the Saginaw Sub and from a standstill have to go slowly through the crossovers and around the wye at the diamond before being able to notch it up to 8 for their ascent. Seemingly regardless of power on the headend, train length or momentum they are able to maintain at the bottom of the hill have a great effect on the trip up Salem.

Never mind crappy rent a wrecks or poor loading units of other sorts

I think GEVOs would do well but maybe that's just cuz I like seeing them!

sd70accsxt700 · Tue Feb 13, 2007 12:39 pm

Yes you guys are biast, a ES44 is the same as a AC44, both 4400 HP.
If they cant do it with two AC44, they probilly wont with two ES44's

TrainWatcher · Tue Feb 13, 2007 12:57 pm

*Reads Matt's Post and is amazed*

still can spell eh? its ok, I ama horribile too...... Really, Must have read the rost wrong, thinking she was a Geep and not an SD50.... my mistake.

csxt4617 · Unread post by **csxt4617** » Tue Feb 13, 2007 2:17 pm

sd70accsxt700 wrote:Yes you guys are biast, a ES44 is the same as a AC44, both 4400 HP.
If they cant do it with two AC44, they probilly wont with two ES44's

I wouldn't think so...AC's are supposed to have better traction, and the ES44's CSX bought are DC. I doubt they'll pull better than the AC4400's.

TrainWatcher · Unread post by **TrainWatcher** » Tue Feb 13, 2007 2:37 pm

Agreed... Now, where do they add and cut off the helpers?

CAT345C · Unread post by **CAT345C** » Tue Feb 13, 2007 3:39 pm

On Salem hill when helpers are availble, they are tacked on at beck road, and cut off at the East End of South Lyon. If helpers are not availble then they are gonna have to double their train to South Lyon with is MP36.02 to MP37.7 I think. Salem is MP30, and Beck Road is about MP26 if Think, only about a 12 mile distance from Plymouth diamond to South Lyon.

TrainWatcher · Unread post by **TrainWatcher** » Thu Feb 15, 2007 7:13 am

Ok, thank you.

RailRoadFan.com

B1G - The Big Train

Pushers through Salem Westbound