Ex TSBY 1997 on the move

Anything pertaining to railfanning in Michigan.
User avatar
Erroneous Monk
Railroadfan...fan
Posts: 226
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2023 1:35 pm
Location: The Water Tower

Re: Ex TSBY 1997 on the move

Unread post by Erroneous Monk »

chapmaja wrote:
Sun Sep 29, 2024 11:19 am
GP30M4216 wrote:
Sat Sep 28, 2024 2:14 pm
I’ve heard 1977 is getting a thorough mechanical assessment at Owosso shops as the desire is to make better use of the resources already on the railroad if feasible. As was said, NW2s are pretty rare these days and it would be neat to have one operating here if it makes sense to do so. Seems like the new general manager at GLC has some good ideas.

Did anyone catch any photos of 1977 on the move to Owosso? They could just keep the 1977 in TSBY colors and now they’ve solved their heritage unit plan, too! :lol:
Supposedly it has been sold to a steel mill in Lorain, Oh, but both mills in Lorain are currently closed and no official announcements have been made about reopening them.
Steel mill more like rumor mill

User avatar
MQT1223
O Scale Railfanner
Posts: 4176
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2014 1:46 pm
Location: Grandville, Michigan
Contact:

Re: Ex TSBY 1997 on the move

Unread post by MQT1223 »

Erroneous Monk wrote:
Sat Sep 28, 2024 3:28 pm
I wonder if they plan to use it as a Owosso yard switcher
This is what I have heard on good authority, assuming that mechanically it checks out.
1223 OUT! President and Founder of the Buck Creek Central, the Rolling River Route! (2012-2017) President and Founder of the Lamberton Valley Railroad, The Tin Plate Road! Proudly railfanning with Asperger's since 1996. :)

ogauge47
Railroadfan...fan
Posts: 202
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2011 12:07 pm
Location: Michigan

Re: Ex TSBY 1997 on the move

Unread post by ogauge47 »

GLC 392 is now filling in as the bumping post in Farwell

User avatar
NS3322
Railroadfan...fan
Posts: 1297
Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2015 12:08 pm
Location: CP-LEVITT

Re: Ex TSBY 1997 on the move

Unread post by NS3322 »

ogauge47 wrote:
Mon Sep 30, 2024 5:52 pm
GLC 392 is now filling in as the bumping post in Farwell
Why do they need a bumping post at Lear?

User avatar
AARR
Incognito and Irrelevant
Posts: 39006
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 7:39 pm
Location: Washington, MI

Re: Ex TSBY 1997 on the move

Unread post by AARR »

And wouldn’t it be more economical just to put a real bumper post in?
NS3322 wrote:
Mon Sep 30, 2024 7:52 pm
ogauge47 wrote:
Mon Sep 30, 2024 5:52 pm
GLC 392 is now filling in as the bumping post in Farwell
Why do they need a bumping post at Lear?
PatC created a monster, 'cause nobody wants to see Don Simon no more they want AARR I'm chopped liver, well if you want AARR this is what I'll give ya, bad humor mixed with irrelevant info that'll make you roll your eyes quicker than a ~Z~ banhammer...

User avatar
Saturnalia
Authority on Cat
Posts: 15462
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2011 7:54 pm
Location: Michigan City, IN
Contact:

Re: Ex TSBY 1997 on the move

Unread post by Saturnalia »

AARR wrote:
Mon Sep 30, 2024 8:35 pm
And wouldn’t it be more economical just to put a real bumper post in?
NS3322 wrote:
Mon Sep 30, 2024 7:52 pm
ogauge47 wrote:
Mon Sep 30, 2024 5:52 pm
GLC 392 is now filling in as the bumping post in Farwell
Why do they need a bumping post at Lear?
Technically the cheapest option "most economical" is whatever mass you have sitting around. Dirt, concrete blocks, etc. In this case an engine with the handbrakes set? Guess it works.
Thornapple River Rail Series - YouTube
Safety today is your investment for tomorrow

joeyuboats
Railroadfan...fan
Posts: 345
Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2019 10:25 am

Re: Ex TSBY 1997 on the move

Unread post by joeyuboats »

Yes,--- some old ties, a pile of gravel, or a steel or poured concrete bumper. Never heard of using a loco as a bumper.Let Lear worry about it--- its their spur. How often is the spur used???

User avatar
MQT1223
O Scale Railfanner
Posts: 4176
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2014 1:46 pm
Location: Grandville, Michigan
Contact:

Re: Ex TSBY 1997 on the move

Unread post by MQT1223 »

Apparently there's some technical loophole about using a locomotive as a bump post versus putting in an actual bump post.
1223 OUT! President and Founder of the Buck Creek Central, the Rolling River Route! (2012-2017) President and Founder of the Lamberton Valley Railroad, The Tin Plate Road! Proudly railfanning with Asperger's since 1996. :)

User avatar
kd_1014
Mike
Posts: 1175
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2018 3:29 pm
Location: Creston, Grand Rapids

Re: Ex TSBY 1997 on the move

Unread post by kd_1014 »

MQT1223 wrote:
Mon Sep 30, 2024 9:10 pm
Apparently there's some technical loophole about using a locomotive as a bump post versus putting in an actual bump post.
It’s a loophole for securing haz-mat cars. Cars coupled to a locomotive are considered secure, thus not requiring a perimeter fence or security.

joeyuboats
Railroadfan...fan
Posts: 345
Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2019 10:25 am

Re: Ex TSBY 1997 on the move

Unread post by joeyuboats »

Was unaware of that rule. Sort of makes sense, but is still goofy.

dalek ling
Railroadfan...fan
Posts: 134
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2021 7:26 pm

Re: Ex TSBY 1997 on the move

Unread post by dalek ling »

I swear, if they just leave 392 there and it becomes the new 1977, im going to be mad, that’s my favorite out of all the GP35’s, and I was honestly excited to see it run again, I guess we were all getting spoiled lately on this railroad

Also the motor is out of 392 so 🤷‍♂️
Last edited by dalek ling on Mon Sep 30, 2024 10:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.

joeyuboats
Railroadfan...fan
Posts: 345
Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2019 10:25 am

Re: Ex TSBY 1997 on the move

Unread post by joeyuboats »

So-- if there is no engine in 392, it's technically NOT a locomotive then. So it seems that it's use as a BUMPER is more important than it's use as a loco--- if that's ALL it needs.

User avatar
SD80MAC
Ingersoll's Mr. Michigan
Posts: 10684
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2005 4:59 pm
Location: Grand Rapids

Re: Ex TSBY 1997 on the move

Unread post by SD80MAC »

joeyuboats wrote:
Tue Oct 01, 2024 4:33 am
So-- if there is no engine in 392, it's technically NOT a locomotive then. So it seems that it's use as a BUMPER is more important than it's use as a loco--- if that's ALL it needs.
Still technically and legally a locomotive. Slugs are legally locomotives and don't have engines. 392 requires a significant amount of work, so its taking the place of the 1977 for the time being.
"Remember, 4 mph is a couple, 5's a collision!"
http://flickriver.com/photos/conrail680 ... teresting/
Image

dalek ling
Railroadfan...fan
Posts: 134
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2021 7:26 pm

Re: Ex TSBY 1997 on the move

Unread post by dalek ling »

SD80MAC wrote:
Tue Oct 01, 2024 9:19 am
joeyuboats wrote:
Tue Oct 01, 2024 4:33 am
So-- if there is no engine in 392, it's technically NOT a locomotive then. So it seems that it's use as a BUMPER is more important than it's use as a loco--- if that's ALL it needs.
Still technically and legally a locomotive. Slugs are legally locomotives and don't have engines. 392 requires a significant amount of work, so its taking the place of the 1977 for the time being.
Oh so it’s not permanent

chapmaja
Railroadfan...fan
Posts: 1507
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 2:02 pm

Re: Ex TSBY 1997 on the move

Unread post by chapmaja »

Erroneous Monk wrote:
Sun Sep 29, 2024 1:01 pm
chapmaja wrote:
Sun Sep 29, 2024 11:19 am
GP30M4216 wrote:
Sat Sep 28, 2024 2:14 pm
I’ve heard 1977 is getting a thorough mechanical assessment at Owosso shops as the desire is to make better use of the resources already on the railroad if feasible. As was said, NW2s are pretty rare these days and it would be neat to have one operating here if it makes sense to do so. Seems like the new general manager at GLC has some good ideas.

Did anyone catch any photos of 1977 on the move to Owosso? They could just keep the 1977 in TSBY colors and now they’ve solved their heritage unit plan, too! :lol:
Supposedly it has been sold to a steel mill in Lorain, Oh, but both mills in Lorain are currently closed and no official announcements have been made about reopening them.
Steel mill more like rumor mill
I hope it is going to be the yard switcher in Owosso. That would be a much better use than selling it to a steel mill that may or may not reopen. Plus I wouldn't say the source of the Steel Mill rumor is the most accurate anyway.

User avatar
AARR
Incognito and Irrelevant
Posts: 39006
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 7:39 pm
Location: Washington, MI

Re: Ex TSBY 1997 on the move

Unread post by AARR »

It seems they are switched once or twice a week. Their spur is rather long but they seldom have more than three cars on it, two of them at the unloading dock.
joeyuboats wrote:
Mon Sep 30, 2024 8:52 pm
Yes,--- some old ties, a pile of gravel, or a steel or poured concrete bumper. Never heard of using a loco as a bumper.Let Lear worry about it--- it’s their spur. How often is the spur used???
PatC created a monster, 'cause nobody wants to see Don Simon no more they want AARR I'm chopped liver, well if you want AARR this is what I'll give ya, bad humor mixed with irrelevant info that'll make you roll your eyes quicker than a ~Z~ banhammer...

User avatar
SD80MAC
Ingersoll's Mr. Michigan
Posts: 10684
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2005 4:59 pm
Location: Grand Rapids

Re: Ex TSBY 1997 on the move

Unread post by SD80MAC »

dalek ling wrote:
Tue Oct 01, 2024 11:38 am
SD80MAC wrote:
Tue Oct 01, 2024 9:19 am
joeyuboats wrote:
Tue Oct 01, 2024 4:33 am
So-- if there is no engine in 392, it's technically NOT a locomotive then. So it seems that it's use as a BUMPER is more important than it's use as a loco--- if that's ALL it needs.
Still technically and legally a locomotive. Slugs are legally locomotives and don't have engines. 392 requires a significant amount of work, so its taking the place of the 1977 for the time being.
Oh so it’s not permanent
We don't know that.
"Remember, 4 mph is a couple, 5's a collision!"
http://flickriver.com/photos/conrail680 ... teresting/
Image

Post Reply