Page 1 of 2
Consumers Energy donates locomotive to Coopersville and Marne Railway
Posted: Mon Feb 13, 2023 5:38 pm
by NS3322
https://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids ... group.html
CPMY 7209 - SL-125 - 1979 - Ex-CPOX 3 - Donated to CPMY in 2023 by Consumers Energy. Former J.H. Campbell plant switcher. Serial # 41109.
Re: Consumers Energy donates locomotive to Coopersville and Marne Railway
Posted: Tue Feb 14, 2023 6:37 pm
by geeb557
I’m not familiar with the dark cloud. Do tell.
Re: Consumers Energy donates locomotive to Coopersville and Marne Railway
Posted: Tue Feb 14, 2023 7:12 pm
by NS3322
geeb557 wrote: ↑Tue Feb 14, 2023 6:37 pm
I’m not familiar with the dark cloud. Do tell.
I am not privy, so I removed my initial comment.
Re: Consumers Energy donates locomotive to Coopersville and Marne Railway
Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2023 12:44 am
by chapmaja
is the Coopersville and Marne still getting occassional freight traffic still, or did that dry up?
Re: Consumers Energy donates locomotive to Coopersville and Marne Railway
Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2023 10:59 am
by Schteinkuh
Those still within the RR have said it weighs in the ballpark of 136 tons as it was fitted with extra ballasting, whether that's true or not I don't really know. However I do recall that the Ottawa sub (CPMY trackage West of Penn Jct) is only rated for 268,000lbs and the GTW set that limit back in the 60s, so if it's really 136T then I'll let everybody do the math on that.
Re: Consumers Energy donates locomotive to Coopersville and Marne Railway
Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2023 11:21 am
by NS3322
chapmaja wrote: ↑Wed Feb 15, 2023 12:44 am
is the Coopersville and Marne still getting occassional freight traffic still, or did that dry up?
Standard Lumber is still an active customer. I think they get switched 2-3 times a week?
Re: Consumers Energy donates locomotive to Coopersville and Marne Railway
Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2023 12:53 pm
by Schteinkuh
NS3322 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 15, 2023 11:21 am
chapmaja wrote: ↑Wed Feb 15, 2023 12:44 am
is the Coopersville and Marne still getting occassional freight traffic still, or did that dry up?
Standard Lumber is still an active customer. I think they get switched 2-3 times a week?
It's down to approximately twice a month now.
Re: Consumers Energy donates locomotive to Coopersville and Marne Railway
Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2023 7:30 pm
by Saturnalia
Schteinkuh wrote: ↑Wed Feb 15, 2023 10:59 am
Those still within the RR have said it weighs in the ballpark of 136 tons as it was fitted with extra ballasting, whether that's true or not I don't really know. However I do recall that the Ottawa sub (CPMY trackage West of Penn Jct) is only rated for 268,000lbs and the GTW set that limit back in the 60s, so if it's really 136T then I'll let everybody do the math on that.
At 136 tons, the engine is only 2 tons heavier than the max you cite. Yeah, its over the old number, but hardly a huge deal ultimately. What matters now are the present bridge ratings.
The SL144 also has a longer wheelbase, measuring 39'3" compared to the EMD SW9's 30'0". That will distribute out the load also. The SL144 weighs 6930 lbs/ft while the SW9 is 8267 lbs/ft.
Re: Consumers Energy donates locomotive to Coopersville and Marne Railway
Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2023 8:10 pm
by Schteinkuh
Saturnalia wrote: ↑Wed Feb 15, 2023 7:30 pm
At 136 tons, the engine is only 2 tons heavier than the max you cite. Yeah, its over the old number, but hardly a huge deal ultimately. What matters now are the present bridge ratings.
The SL144 also has a longer wheelbase, measuring 39'3" compared to the EMD SW9's 30'0". That will distribute out the load also. The SL144 weighs 6930 lbs/ft while the SW9 is 8267 lbs/ft.
Would you look a regulatory agent in the eye and say "but it's only 2 tons!", yes or no?
There are no bridge ratings. For the whole railroad. I persistently asked years ago and got a bunch of roundabout answers of how bridges don't have ratings like track does. If this railroad was a space shuttle it'd be Challenger. Or Columbia.
Re: Consumers Energy donates locomotive to Coopersville and Marne Railway
Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2023 9:30 pm
by TC Man
Schteinkuh wrote: ↑Wed Feb 15, 2023 8:10 pm
Saturnalia wrote: ↑Wed Feb 15, 2023 7:30 pm
At 136 tons, the engine is only 2 tons heavier than the max you cite. Yeah, its over the old number, but hardly a huge deal ultimately. What matters now are the present bridge ratings.
The SL144 also has a longer wheelbase, measuring 39'3" compared to the EMD SW9's 30'0". That will distribute out the load also. The SL144 weighs 6930 lbs/ft while the SW9 is 8267 lbs/ft.
Would you look a regulatory agent in the eye and say "but it's only 2 tons!", yes or no?
There are no bridge ratings. For the whole railroad. I persistently asked years ago and got a bunch of roundabout answers of how bridges don't have ratings like track does. If this railroad was a space shuttle it'd be Challenger. Or Columbia.
Sounds like a disgruntled former volunteer....
Re: Consumers Energy donates locomotive to Coopersville and Marne Railway
Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2023 10:05 pm
by Schteinkuh
TC Man wrote: ↑Wed Feb 15, 2023 9:30 pm
Sounds like a disgruntled former volunteer....
There's a good reason almost 15 of them just walked off about a year ago
Re: Consumers Energy donates locomotive to Coopersville and Marne Railway
Posted: Thu Feb 16, 2023 12:35 am
by chapmaja
Is standard lumber right by Fruitridge and I96?
Re: Consumers Energy donates locomotive to Coopersville and Marne Railway
Posted: Thu Feb 16, 2023 6:58 am
by Saturnalia
Schteinkuh wrote: ↑Wed Feb 15, 2023 8:10 pm
Saturnalia wrote: ↑Wed Feb 15, 2023 7:30 pm
At 136 tons, the engine is only 2 tons heavier than the max you cite. Yeah, its over the old number, but hardly a huge deal ultimately. What matters now are the present bridge ratings.
The SL144 also has a longer wheelbase, measuring 39'3" compared to the EMD SW9's 30'0". That will distribute out the load also. The SL144 weighs 6930 lbs/ft while the SW9 is 8267 lbs/ft.
Would you look a regulatory agent in the eye and say "but it's only 2 tons!", yes or no?
There are no bridge ratings. For the whole railroad. I persistently asked years ago and got a bunch of roundabout answers of how bridges don't have ratings like track does. If this railroad was a space shuttle it'd be Challenger. Or Columbia.
Track ratings typically are designed around the idea that everything below the limit is 100% ok without review. Basically, they’d want to review anything heavier, not necessarily ban anything heavier.
Railroads issue overweight permits all the time, including to themselves. Often if it’s a repeat customer they’ll do an analysis, including wheelbase to figure how well the weight is distributed, then make a call as to what restrictions need to be in place, most often a speed restriction.
Given that, it’s not at all hard to see where a locomotive that’s two tons over the statutory limit would be permitted to operate on a regular basis. If the track speed were higher they might prescribe a slower speed, but since the C&M is slow anyway, it wouldn’t really be an issue.
The bridge ratings thing though is everything. You can run GEVOs on basically any track including 90# rail, you’re just going to be breaking a lot of stuff. The bridges are what really matters for load ratings.
Some good examples of repeat heavy loads are ore Jennies, hot bottle cars and certain locomotives. As described above, they’ll often have speed restrictions over certain bridges, usually prescribed in the timetable if the move is frequent enough.
Re: Consumers Energy donates locomotive to Coopersville and Marne Railway
Posted: Thu Feb 16, 2023 7:23 am
by ~Z~
chapmaja wrote: ↑Thu Feb 16, 2023 12:35 am
Is standard lumber right by Fruitridge and I96?
Standard Building Systems at this site, but yes, that is corrrrrreccttt.
Re: Consumers Energy donates locomotive to Coopersville and Marne Railway
Posted: Thu Feb 16, 2023 7:56 am
by Standard Railfan
Schteinkuh wrote: ↑Wed Feb 15, 2023 8:10 pm
Would you look a regulatory agent in the eye and say "but it's only 2 tons!", yes or no?
Don’t completely fill the fuel tank
Re: Consumers Energy donates locomotive to Coopersville and Marne Railway
Posted: Thu Feb 16, 2023 10:21 am
by NS3322
~Z~ wrote: ↑Thu Feb 16, 2023 7:23 am
chapmaja wrote: ↑Thu Feb 16, 2023 12:35 am
Is standard lumber right by Fruitridge and I96?
Standard Building Systems at this site, but yes, that is corrrrrreccttt.
All these years I've only heard it referred to as Standard Lumber... This has been corrected on the Wiki.
Do they only receive cars for the truss business, or also for the lumber and supply aspect?
Re: Consumers Energy donates locomotive to Coopersville and Marne Railway
Posted: Thu Feb 16, 2023 11:00 am
by Schteinkuh
Standard Railfan wrote: ↑Thu Feb 16, 2023 7:56 am
Schteinkuh wrote: ↑Wed Feb 15, 2023 8:10 pm
Would you look a regulatory agent in the eye and say "but it's only 2 tons!", yes or no?
Don’t completely fill the fuel tank
HAHA! Okay that was pretty good
Saturnalia wrote: ↑Thu Feb 16, 2023 6:58 am
Track ratings typically are designed around the idea that everything below the limit is 100% ok without review. Basically, they’d want to review anything heavier, not necessarily ban anything heavier.
Railroads issue overweight permits all the time, including to themselves. Often if it’s a repeat customer they’ll do an analysis, including wheelbase to figure how well the weight is distributed, then make a call as to what restrictions need to be in place, most often a speed restriction.
Given that, it’s not at all hard to see where a locomotive that’s two tons over the statutory limit would be permitted to operate on a regular basis. If the track speed were higher they might prescribe a slower speed, but since the C&M is slow anyway, it wouldn’t really be an issue.
The bridge ratings thing though is everything. You can run GEVOs on basically any track including 90# rail, you’re just going to be breaking a lot of stuff. The bridges are what really matters for load ratings.
Some good examples of repeat heavy loads are ore Jennies, hot bottle cars and certain locomotives. As described above, they’ll often have speed restrictions over certain bridges, usually prescribed in the timetable if the move is frequent enough.
I agree that the bridges (or specifically the people in charge of them) are a far bigger concern. The condition of the infrastructure and the actions/inactions of two specific power players in the company were a major factor in what happened last year. If you shoot me your email (I'll do this for anyone who PMs me), I'd be more than happy send you the full bridge inspection report from 2020-2021 and you can make more educated judgements from there. While I crawl in my skin hearing your views on labor management, I wholeheartly respect your engineering knowledge.
I've refrained from doing a full write-up of all of my experiences and concerns collected from 9 years of service there for over a year now. I'm fairly certain that some of the current management doesn't even know half of what was going on, and after lots of discussion that's been had on and off this site, I plan on sending a full write up internally before anything else. I desperately want to see them make the necessary changes that will make the place safer, with or without me.
Re: Consumers Energy donates locomotive to Coopersville and Marne Railway
Posted: Thu Feb 16, 2023 4:49 pm
by GP30M4216
The donation of the SL-125 is a win for railroad preservation, a win for local history, and a win for C&M, whoops, I mean the Coopersville Monorail.
There weren’t very many SL-125s made and someday, it may be the biggest thing left in existence from the West Olive power plant.
Didn’t west olive also used to have some kind of SW unit for switching, too?
Re: Consumers Energy donates locomotive to Coopersville and Marne Railway
Posted: Thu Feb 16, 2023 5:40 pm
by Schteinkuh
GP30M4216 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 16, 2023 4:49 pm
Didn’t west olive also used to have some kind of SW unit for switching, too?
Yeah they uhhh kinda wrecked it lol
Re: Consumers Energy donates locomotive to Coopersville and Marne Railway
Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2023 6:48 pm
by joeyuboats
One of the above comments was NOT to fill the fuel tank. I remember reading about when MEC RR got some of the EX ROCK U25B's, and because of some trackage being a bit on the light side, and the U25's being a bit heavy, that is exactly what they did.