Consumers Energy donates locomotive to Coopersville and Marne Railway
Consumers Energy donates locomotive to Coopersville and Marne Railway
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.
CPMY 7209 - SL-125 - 1979 - Ex-CPOX 3 - Donated to CPMY in 2023 by Consumers Energy. Former J.H. Campbell plant switcher. Serial # 41109.
Last edited by NS3322 on Tue Feb 14, 2023 7:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Consumers Energy donates locomotive to Coopersville and Marne Railway
I’m not familiar with the dark cloud. Do tell.
Re: Consumers Energy donates locomotive to Coopersville and Marne Railway
I am not privy, so I removed my initial comment.
Re: Consumers Energy donates locomotive to Coopersville and Marne Railway
is the Coopersville and Marne still getting occassional freight traffic still, or did that dry up?
- Schteinkuh
- Railcam Terrorizer
- Posts: 686
- Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2011 4:06 pm
- Location: LansingRailFan’s Mom’s House
Re: Consumers Energy donates locomotive to Coopersville and Marne Railway
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.
According to all known laws of aviation, there is no way a bee should be able to fly. Its wings are too small to get its fat little body off the ground. The bee, of course, flies anyway because bees don't care what humans think is impossible.
Re: Consumers Energy donates locomotive to Coopersville and Marne Railway
Standard Lumber is still an active customer. I think they get switched 2-3 times a week?
- Schteinkuh
- Railcam Terrorizer
- Posts: 686
- Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2011 4:06 pm
- Location: LansingRailFan’s Mom’s House
Re: Consumers Energy donates locomotive to Coopersville and Marne Railway
It's down to approximately twice a month now.
According to all known laws of aviation, there is no way a bee should be able to fly. Its wings are too small to get its fat little body off the ground. The bee, of course, flies anyway because bees don't care what humans think is impossible.
- Saturnalia
- Authority on Cat
- Posts: 15412
- Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2011 7:54 pm
- Location: Michigan City, IN
- Contact:
Re: Consumers Energy donates locomotive to Coopersville and Marne Railway
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.Schteinkuh wrote: ↑Wed Feb 15, 2023 10:59 amThose 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.
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.
- Schteinkuh
- Railcam Terrorizer
- Posts: 686
- Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2011 4:06 pm
- Location: LansingRailFan’s Mom’s House
Re: Consumers Energy donates locomotive to Coopersville and Marne Railway
Would you look a regulatory agent in the eye and say "but it's only 2 tons!", yes or no?Saturnalia wrote: ↑Wed Feb 15, 2023 7:30 pmAt 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.
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.
According to all known laws of aviation, there is no way a bee should be able to fly. Its wings are too small to get its fat little body off the ground. The bee, of course, flies anyway because bees don't care what humans think is impossible.
Re: Consumers Energy donates locomotive to Coopersville and Marne Railway
Sounds like a disgruntled former volunteer....Schteinkuh wrote: ↑Wed Feb 15, 2023 8:10 pmWould you look a regulatory agent in the eye and say "but it's only 2 tons!", yes or no?Saturnalia wrote: ↑Wed Feb 15, 2023 7:30 pmAt 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.
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.
CEO of the Waving Institute- teaching great wave forms.
- Schteinkuh
- Railcam Terrorizer
- Posts: 686
- Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2011 4:06 pm
- Location: LansingRailFan’s Mom’s House
Re: Consumers Energy donates locomotive to Coopersville and Marne Railway
There's a good reason almost 15 of them just walked off about a year ago
According to all known laws of aviation, there is no way a bee should be able to fly. Its wings are too small to get its fat little body off the ground. The bee, of course, flies anyway because bees don't care what humans think is impossible.
Re: Consumers Energy donates locomotive to Coopersville and Marne Railway
Is standard lumber right by Fruitridge and I96?
- Saturnalia
- Authority on Cat
- Posts: 15412
- Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2011 7:54 pm
- Location: Michigan City, IN
- Contact:
Re: Consumers Energy donates locomotive to Coopersville and Marne Railway
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.Schteinkuh wrote: ↑Wed Feb 15, 2023 8:10 pmWould you look a regulatory agent in the eye and say "but it's only 2 tons!", yes or no?Saturnalia wrote: ↑Wed Feb 15, 2023 7:30 pmAt 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.
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.
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.
- ~Z~
- Sofa King Admin
- Posts: 12994
- Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 2:14 pm
- Location: Grand Rapids, MI
- Contact:
Re: Consumers Energy donates locomotive to Coopersville and Marne Railway
Standard Building Systems at this site, but yes, that is corrrrrreccttt.
Webmaster
Railroad photos on Railroadfan.com
Railroad photos on Railroadfan.com
- Standard Railfan
- Railroadfan...fan
- Posts: 1812
- Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2012 7:25 pm
- Location: Marquette, MI
Re: Consumers Energy donates locomotive to Coopersville and Marne Railway
Don’t completely fill the fuel tankSchteinkuh 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?
Re: Consumers Energy donates locomotive to Coopersville and Marne Railway
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?
- Schteinkuh
- Railcam Terrorizer
- Posts: 686
- Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2011 4:06 pm
- Location: LansingRailFan’s Mom’s House
Re: Consumers Energy donates locomotive to Coopersville and Marne Railway
HAHA! Okay that was pretty goodStandard Railfan wrote: ↑Thu Feb 16, 2023 7:56 amDon’t completely fill the fuel tankSchteinkuh 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?
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.Saturnalia wrote: ↑Thu Feb 16, 2023 6:58 amTrack 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'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.
According to all known laws of aviation, there is no way a bee should be able to fly. Its wings are too small to get its fat little body off the ground. The bee, of course, flies anyway because bees don't care what humans think is impossible.
-
- Saver of all History
- Posts: 4875
- Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2004 10:35 pm
- Location: Feel the Zeel, MI
- Contact:
Re: Consumers Energy donates locomotive to Coopersville and Marne Railway
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?
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?
- Schteinkuh
- Railcam Terrorizer
- Posts: 686
- Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2011 4:06 pm
- Location: LansingRailFan’s Mom’s House
Re: Consumers Energy donates locomotive to Coopersville and Marne Railway
Yeah they uhhh kinda wrecked it lol
According to all known laws of aviation, there is no way a bee should be able to fly. Its wings are too small to get its fat little body off the ground. The bee, of course, flies anyway because bees don't care what humans think is impossible.
-
- Railroadfan...fan
- Posts: 280
- Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2019 10:25 am
Re: Consumers Energy donates locomotive to Coopersville and Marne Railway
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.