Yeah, no kidding there! Considering fueling up a newer road engine costs as much as a new vehicle.Raildudes dad wrote:I wouldn't want to pay for a "fillup" on any of them
GLC 395, 396, 399
Re: GLC 395, 396, 399
- AARR
- Incognito and Irrelevant
- Posts: 39029
- Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 7:39 pm
- Location: Washington, MI
Re: GLC 395, 396, 399
Arbedeen & Rockfish had a GP38 with a small tank.
The Bay Line had a GP39 with a small tank.
I'm sure there were a few more.
The Bay Line had a GP39 with a small tank.
I'm sure there were a few more.
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...
- MIGN-Todd
- Railroadfan...fan
- Posts: 425
- Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2008 3:35 pm
- Location: Traverse City, Michigan
Re: GLC 395, 396, 399
As much as I like the old 35's, newer power on the line will be neat to see. Going to have to start bringing my camera to work with me now so I won't miss anymore shots. Maybe I'll be the first to catch one of the new ones in TC (I'll be sure to push some snow in front of KC's car to keep him side-lined).
U.S.Army Retired- under new management (see wife)
- GLC 392
- TSBY/GLC KID
- Posts: 2741
- Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2007 11:00 pm
- Location: S&M tower, Ludville.
- Contact:
Re: GLC 395, 396, 399
Quick update. 395, 399 arrive Battle creek MI, 396 bad ordered Flint MI, 398 place hold CN in ??? KY, 397 placed at customer in Puducah KY.
-
- The Beast
- Posts: 5934
- Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 1:28 pm
Re: GLC 395, 396, 399
Wow, I can already see that these might be a little bit more of a handful than GLC expects. Didn't even make it to its new digs yet!GLC 392 wrote:396 bad ordered Flint MI
- AARR
- Incognito and Irrelevant
- Posts: 39029
- Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 7:39 pm
- Location: Washington, MI
Re: GLC 395, 396, 399
I checked my notes and I think I boo-booed. I think the units were originally delivered to PC and not MP.
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...
- SD80MAC
- Ingersoll's Mr. Michigan
- Posts: 10691
- Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2005 4:59 pm
- Location: Grand Rapids
Re: GLC 395, 396, 399
Honestly James, where do you come up with these outlandish opinions?TrainWatcher wrote:Wow, I can already see that these might be a little bit more of a handful than GLC expects. Didn't even make it to its new digs yet!GLC 392 wrote:396 bad ordered Flint MI
"Remember, 4 mph is a couple, 5's a collision!"
http://flickriver.com/photos/conrail680 ... teresting/
http://flickriver.com/photos/conrail680 ... teresting/
- GLC 392
- TSBY/GLC KID
- Posts: 2741
- Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2007 11:00 pm
- Location: S&M tower, Ludville.
- Contact:
Re: GLC 395, 396, 399
Jon i can see it already as well, remember how many problems they had with the GMTX Geeps? their coming from the same place more or less and they already had problems before they were sent here thats one reason they have been delayed.
- SD80MAC
- Ingersoll's Mr. Michigan
- Posts: 10691
- Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2005 4:59 pm
- Location: Grand Rapids
Re: GLC 395, 396, 399
I never heard about any problems with the GATX units, guess I must be out of the loop. But my point is you can base your assumption on facts whereas James most likely is basing his on the fact that 1 of units suddenly got bad ordered enroute.GLC 392 wrote:Jon i can see it already as well, remember how many problems they had with the GMTX Geeps? their coming from the same place more or less and they already had problems before they were sent here thats one reason they have been delayed.
"Remember, 4 mph is a couple, 5's a collision!"
http://flickriver.com/photos/conrail680 ... teresting/
http://flickriver.com/photos/conrail680 ... teresting/
- GLC 392
- TSBY/GLC KID
- Posts: 2741
- Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2007 11:00 pm
- Location: S&M tower, Ludville.
- Contact:
Re: GLC 395, 396, 399
When they first arrived they spent more time in the shop then the road, for a good two months plus. Electrical problems were the main problem if i remember correctly.
Re: GLC 395, 396, 399
Well, at this point it is hard to speculate about anything or jump to conclusions; even based on prior happenings. Just because the unit was bad ordered doesn't mean anything. While NRE does produce junk, I'm sure the unit was not online so that narrows down the number of things it could be tagged for. Maybe someone forgot to put the blue card back in the cab or something. And just because one has a problem, doesn't mean they are all going to fail...
-
- The Beast
- Posts: 5934
- Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 1:28 pm
Re: GLC 395, 396, 399
Notice the word MIGHT Jon. I do not know anyone from NRE or the GLC personally. Like Tops said, we don't know. But, I find it funny it didn't even make it to Durand or Owosso yet without someone tagging it B/O.Conrail Jon wrote:Honestly James, where do you come up with these outlandish opinions?TrainWatcher wrote:Wow, I can already see that these might be a little bit more of a handful than GLC expects. Didn't even make it to its new digs yet!GLC 392 wrote:396 bad ordered Flint MI
Re: GLC 395, 396, 399
They may not even be running. They may be dead/drained, so it may be something like blue card expired, bad hand brake or something like that. It could be a million things, and that being said, it's not like engines getting bad ordered is a strange occurance. Although usually, railroads just run their junk without bad ordering it. Most of our power on UP should be bad ordered but we still use it. It is strange though, that it just came from NRE and are already bad ordered. That's what is amusing to me. Probably a blooper on NRE's part...they probably forgot to put wheels underneath the trucks or something.
-
- Saver of all History
- Posts: 4994
- Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2004 10:35 pm
- Location: Feel the Zeel, MI
- Contact:
Re: GLC 395, 396, 399
Details....detailsThat's what is amusing to me. Probably a blooper on NRE's part...they probably forgot to put wheels underneath the trucks or something.
Re: GLC 395, 396, 399
These units date back to the PC days? No wonder they're junk.GP30M4216 wrote:Details....detailsThat's what is amusing to me. Probably a blooper on NRE's part...they probably forgot to put wheels underneath the trucks or something.
- SD80MAC
- Ingersoll's Mr. Michigan
- Posts: 10691
- Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2005 4:59 pm
- Location: Grand Rapids
Re: GLC 395, 396, 399
If they're originally PC as Don suspects they could be part of the 100 units EMD took back from Conrail in IIRC 1987 when their leases expired. They all went into the EMDX fleet but it wouldn't surprise me if UP bought a few over the years.
"Remember, 4 mph is a couple, 5's a collision!"
http://flickriver.com/photos/conrail680 ... teresting/
http://flickriver.com/photos/conrail680 ... teresting/
-
- Sofa King follower
- Posts: 6159
- Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 1:59 pm
- Location: Toledo, OH.
Re: GLC 395, 396, 399
It is already known that at least the 399 is ex-PC built for PC, I would think the rest are, but have not gotten any more info on the units. But seing as 396 & 395 also have the UP tell tale goffy MU cable holder on them I would guess they are also ex-PC units by way of LLPX. Here is the thread on it already.
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=18551&hilit=GLC+million&start=20
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=18551&hilit=GLC+million&start=20
https://flic.kr/ps/jSuAb My Flickr photos!