Jump to content

Recommended Posts

On 4/12/2018 at 8:24 AM, Shaun said:

Why did they discontinue the expressway service? Not enough demand? 

I think thats part of the problem. I filmed the Eastbound Expressway about an hour ago, and as you can see there are more than a few empties.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It could be that its easier to use containers, since they can be double stacked as well. Has the intermodal business increased at the expense of moving actual trailers? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/12/2018 at 8:24 AM, Shaun said:

Why did they discontinue the expressway service? Not enough demand? 

Just wanting to standardize since they haul only trailers in one lane. CP stopped taking trailers years ago on other lanes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 years after the end of the Vancouver Olympics, as of yesterday CP STILL has at lease one GEVO still with the Olympics wrap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CP SD40-2’s active (28 of them)...more to come

CP 5743 A Montana,AB June 24 at 15:41pm
CP 5756 D Bredenbury,SK June 24 at 18:12pm
CP 5792 A Preston,Iowa June 24 at 02:00am
CP 5866 A Kenora,ON June 22
CP 5875 A Golden,BC June 9
CP 5876 A Toronto Yard,ON May 27
CP 5878 A Thief River,Mn June 23
CP 5908 A Donald,BC June 19
CP 5949 A Alyth,AB June 20
CP 5973 A Winnipeg,MB June 2
CP 5976 A Winnipeg,MB June 23
CP 5987 A Campbell Creek Transfer,BC June 23
CP 6011 A St-Paul,Mn June 23
CP 6012 A Schreiber,ON May 29
CP 6017 A Dunmore,AB June 22
CP 6018 A Sudbury,ON June 13
CP 6025 D Mason City,Iowa June 11
CP 6028 A Minnesota,Mn June 21
CP 6030 A Alyth,AB June 17
CP 6042 A Montreal,Qc June 15
CP 6045 A Campbell Creek Transfer,BC June 23
CP 6055 D Winnipeg,MB June 24 at 13:09pm
CP 6062 A Hamilton,ON 20:02pm
CP 6063 A Golden,BC June 21
CP 6067 A Inter.Minnesota,Mn June 7
CP 6068 A Alyth,AB June 17
CP 6073 A St-Paul,Mn June 23
CP 6607 A Schreiber,ON May 29

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, TTC T6H-5307N 2252 said:

CP SD40-2’s active (28 of them)...more to come

CP 5743 A Montana,AB June 24 at 15:41pm

CP 5756 D Bredenbury,SK June 24 at 18:12pm

CP 5792 A Preston,Iowa June 24 at 02:00am

CP 5866 A Kenora,ON June 22

CP 5875 A Golden,BC June 9

CP 5876 A Toronto Yard,ON May 27

CP 5878 A Thief River,Mn June 23

CP 5908 A Donald,BC June 19

CP 5949 A Alyth,AB June 20

CP 5973 A Winnipeg,MB June 2

CP 5976 A Winnipeg,MB June 23

CP 5987 A Campbell Creek Transfer,BC June 23

CP 6011 A St-Paul,Mn June 23

CP 6012 A Schreiber,ON May 29

CP 6017 A Dunmore,AB June 22

CP 6018 A Sudbury,ON June 13

CP 6025 D Mason City,Iowa June 11

CP 6028 A Minnesota,Mn June 21

CP 6030 A Alyth,AB June 17

CP 6042 A Montreal,Qc June 15

CP 6045 A Campbell Creek Transfer,BC June 23

CP 6055 D Winnipeg,MB June 24 at 13:09pm

CP 6062 A Hamilton,ON 20:02pm

CP 6063 A Golden,BC June 21

CP 6067 A Inter.Minnesota,Mn June 7

CP 6068 A Alyth,AB June 17

CP 6073 A St-Paul,Mn June 23

CP 6607 A Schreiber,ON May 29

Too bad the lone Large Multimark units (5863 and 5911) aren't among the 28 that you listed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sighting for the SD60/Ms

CP 6221 A Eastport,ID November 14
CP 6222 A Bredenbury,SK June 26
CP 6223 A Toronto Vaughn,ON June 19
SOO 6024 (CP 6306) D Harper,Il 11:05am
CP 6225 A Winnipeg,MB June 25
SOO 6026 (CP 6304) A Kenora,ON June 30
SOO 6027 (CP 6307) D Unknown,Iowa June 30
CP 6228 A Alyth,AB 04:35am
CP 6229 A Winnipeg,MB 03:32am
CP 6230 D Montana,AB 06:46am
CP 6231 D Nahant,Iowa 03:41am
CP 6232 A Milwaukee,Wi 09:44am
SOO 6033 (CP 6300) A Unknown,AB June 30
CP 6234 A Moose Jaw,SK June 28
SOO 6035 (CP 6302) A Lethbridge,AB June 30
CP 6236 D St-Paul,Mn June 30
SOO 6037 (CP 6301) A Coquitlam,BC June 30
CP 6238 (CP 6309) A Lethbridge,AB 10:46am
CP 6239 A Lethbridge,AB June 30
CP 6240 D Unknown,BC June 30
CP 6241 A Winnipeg,MB 03:32am
CP 6242 D St-Paul,Mn 10:46am
CP 6243 A Dunmore,AB 02:54am
SOO 6044 (CP 6303) D Winnipeg,MB June 28
CP 6245 D Max,ND June 30 at 21:31pm
CP 6246 D St-Paul,Mn 10:46am
CP 6247 A Eastport,ID June 15
CP 6248 D Winnipeg,MB 11:19am
CP 6249 D Minot,ND June 30 at 23:45pm
CP 6250 (CP 6308)
CP 6251 A Noyes,Mn 08:13am
CP 6252 D Harvey,ND June 30
SOO 6053 (CP 6305) A Unknown,SK June 29
CP 6254 D Swift Current,SK 08:43am
CP 6255 A Mason City,Iowa June 30
CP 6256 D Thief River,Mn 11:47am
CP 6257 A Bredenbury,SK June 30
CP 6258 D Unknown 11:15am
CP 6259 A Sutherland,SK June 30
CP 6260 A Wynyard,SK June 30
CP 6261 A Falconbridge,ON June 29
CP 6262 A Winnipeg,MB June 24

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not directly related to CP Power but thought some here might have some insights. Cross posted from the GO Transit thread.

This isn't directly related to GO construction but I can't think of a better thread. Took the GO train to Hamilton last night and to the Hunter St station. Passed through the work happening at Bayview Junction. Nothing further to note beyond what's been posted here. What I found interesting is that all the CTC signals on the CP line from Bayview Junction to Hunter Street station appeared to be turned off. Also, it looked like the tracks really aren't used that often but maybe that's just my perception. Is traffic down on this portion of the CP network? I also notice that the train travels pretty slowly from Bayview Junction into the Hunter Street station. 

Bringing this back to the topic of this thread I wonder if a slowdown by CP would allow GO to do any upgrades on the track? Or do the curves and the tunnel really limit how much can really be done here?
 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CP SD40-2’s active (33 of them)...more to come
CP 5743 A Lethbridge,AB July 26 at 13:38pm
CP 5756 A Winnipeg,MB July 9
CP 5790 A Lethbridge,AB July 26 at 15:26pm
CP 5792 D Portage,Wi July 26 at 15:25pm
CP 5866 A Winnipeg,MB July 9
CP 5875 A Unknown,BC July 25
CP 5876 A Toronto Yard,ON May 27
CP 5878 D Max,ND July 20
CP 5908 A Unknown,BC July 25
CP 5922 A White River,ON July 26 at 14:07pm
CP 5936 A Toronto Yard,ON July 14
CP 5946 D Glenwood,Mn July 10
CP 5949 A Alyth,AB June 20
CP 5973 A Winnipeg,MB July 9
CP 5976 A Lethbridge,AB July 26 at 15:26pm
CP 5987 A Green Valley,BC July 26 at 11:00am
CP 6011 A Lethbridge,AB July 26 at 15:26pm
CP 6012 A Toronto Yard,ON July 18
CP 6017 A Medicine Hat,AB July 26 at 03:45am
CP 6018 D Milwaukee,Wi July 26 at 15:47pm
CP 6025 A Mason City,Iowa June 11
CP 6028 A Minnesota,Mn July 24
CP 6030 D Revelstoke,BC July 26 at 15:38pm
CP 6045 A Green Valley,BC July 26 at 11:00am
CP 6054 A Coquitlam,BC July 23
CP 6055 A Wilkie,SK July 26 at 18:37pm
CP 6062 D Ignace,ON July 26 at 17:04pm
CP 6063 A Lethbridge,AB July 26 at 15:26pm
CP 6067 D Max,ND July 20
CP 6068 D Revelstoke,BC July 26 at 15:38pm
CP 6073 A Thunder Bay,ON July 26 at 10:55am
CP 6607 A Toronto Yard,ON July 18
CP 6613 D Winnipeg,MB July 9

In Sudbury shop:
CP 5968 A Sudbury,ON June 17
CP 5879 A Sudbury,ON July 14

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/18/2018 at 8:16 PM, WMATAC40LF said:

Thought I'd share this link. GE is rebuilding 30 more AC4400CWs for the CP, which will be numbered in the 8200s. 

http://trn.trains.com/news/news-wire/2018/10/18-ge-tests-newly-re-built-locomotives-in-erie

I'm thinking this will be done on an as needed basis much like the gp20c eco order?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Peterbiltguy1989@gmail.com said:

I'm thinking this will be done on an as needed basis much like the gp20c eco order?

 

It doesn't seem to be. They seem to have a fairly long-term plan to do batches of rebuilds for the next several years, and to do them by grouped order/build - likely to try and minimize the amont of time that each unit will be down.


Dan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is an interesting read. CP's CEO is apparently not considering any new locomotive purchases until 2021 (at the earliest). His reasoning is that new Tier 4 units are more expensive and less reliable than the rebuilt locos CP is currently receiving. The fact that new engines are more expensive is well, pretty self explanatory. The stuff he's saying about reliability though is sort of up in the air, although I wouldn't be surprised if it were true. EGR adds more moving parts to prime movers (which can fail), and is also known to decrease fuel economy.

http://trn.trains.com/news/news-wire/2018/11/29-canadian-pacific-doesnt-expect-to-buy-new-locomotives-until-2021-at-the-earliest 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The same complicated emissions control systems that have drastically increased maintenance costs and decreased fuel efficiency in the automotive sector are used in tier 4 locomotives. The only difference between the two segments is scale.

Mr. Creel is using the same strategy that many trucking fleets have done for the last 15 or so years by purchasing “glider” kits. That particular loophole in EPA policy is now being closed however, at least for “on highway” equipment.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The funny thing about freight locomotives is that the price per unit hasn't changed drastically in the past 20 years, and taking into account inflation they are cheaper today than they used to be back then. And the electronics and traction control systems available on modern AC-traction diesel loco allow a single ET44 to easily replace 2 SD50s.

 

And yet, CP (and NS as well) may be onto something here. For $2mil they get a loco that has all of the modern bells and whistles, and at the rail will perform like any state-of-the-art unit. But from a reliability standpoint, they don't have to deal with all of the complicated wizardry necessary to make the locos meet the modern emissions standards.

 

Dan

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You both make very good points. In the end of the day, if there's a loophole that allows railroads to save money, they'll probably exploit it. 

NS is definitely into this, given their plans to rebuild hundreds of older units over the coming years. Their rebuild strategy has also earned them emissions "credits" (because they are improving the emissions certifications on certain rebuilds). These credits were used to order 40 new Tier 3 EMDs this year. 

Union Pacific is also straying away from new power. They received significant amounts of both GE and EMD Tier 4 units, and haven't been terribly impressed (especially with the later, given all of its bugs). They have reportedly signed a contract with GE to rebuild upwards of 900 older AC units (AC4460s and AC4400s) over the coming years.

On top of this, the only two railroads that have significant orders for Tier 4 units right now (KCS and CN) are both splitting their orders up to receive Tier 4 credit units alongside Tier 4s. 

The question then becomes when (or if) something will be done to close this loophole. As noted above, the "glider" truck loophole is supposedly being dealt with, but locomotive rebuilds aren't as regulated. I believe there is a rule stating that if the new content in a rebuilt loco exceeds a certain percentage, then it has to meet Tier 4. However, what the Class 1s have been doing falls well below this threshold. 

I'm also curious as to whether Canada currently requires new locomotives to meet Tier 4 standards. There has been some talk about changing the lack of regulations (which CN exploited a couple of years ago), but I'm not sure if that has happened. Of course purchasing a bunch of Canada-only units might not make logistical sense for CP.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, WMATAC40LF said:

As noted above, the "glider" truck loophole is supposedly being dealt with, but locomotive rebuilds aren't as regulated.

I don't know the situation in Canada as well, but in the US this is not true. As a very basic starting point, the locomotive must meet the emissions standard of the date it was originally built. Beyond that (and admittedly, I don't know exactly what this threshold is), a locomotive receiving a substantial rebuild must meet the next most recent emissions standard than the one it was built with - frequently Tier 0+, although I have seen some rebuilds that claim to meet Tier 1 or Tier 2+.

 

Dan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, smallspy said:

I don't know the situation in Canada as well, but in the US this is not true. As a very basic starting point, the locomotive must meet the emissions standard of the date it was originally built. Beyond that (and admittedly, I don't know exactly what this threshold is), a locomotive receiving a substantial rebuild must meet the next most recent emissions standard than the one it was built with - frequently Tier 0+, although I have seen some rebuilds that claim to meet Tier 1 or Tier 2+.

 

Dan

By not as regulated I didn't mean completely unregulated (the regulations surrounding glider tucks and rebuilt locomotives are quite different). Most of the NS rebuilds are certified to either Tier 0+ or Tier 1 (which is equal or superior to what the locomotives had met when they were first built). I couldn't find details on the CP units, but they should be at least Tier 0+. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/30/2018 at 12:25 AM, WMATAC40LF said:

This is an interesting read. CP's CEO is apparently not considering any new locomotive purchases until 2021 (at the earliest). His reasoning is that new Tier 4 units are more expensive and less reliable than the rebuilt locos CP is currently receiving. The fact that new engines are more expensive is well, pretty self explanatory. The stuff he's saying about reliability though is sort of up in the air, although I wouldn't be surprised if it were true. EGR adds more moving parts to prime movers (which can fail), and is also known to decrease fuel economy.

http://trn.trains.com/news/news-wire/2018/11/29-canadian-pacific-doesnt-expect-to-buy-new-locomotives-until-2021-at-the-earliest 

 

CP has enough stored GE's to rebuild to last them until then. Also if the SD70AC conversion does well they will do more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×