How Heavy Is A Heavy Train?

Home » How Heavy Is A Train » How Heavy Is A Heavy Train?

Maybe your like

Home Open Account Help 449 users online
Trainorders.com
Western Railroad Discussion > How Heavy is a Heavy Train? Pages: [ 1 ][ 2 ] [ Next ] Current Page:1 of 2 Date: 01/07/12 22:55 How Heavy is a Heavy Train? Author: sd60m I was reading that Potash train thread down below and it mentioned the train was 19K+tons. How heavy is a typical Powder River Basin coal train, a unit grain train, or an ethanol train...what is the heaviest train any of you may have operated? Thanks for any kind response. Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/08/12 07:19 by sd60m. [ Reply To This Message ] [ Quote ] Date: 01/07/12 23:17 Re: How Heavy is a Heavy Train Author: funnelfan Depends on the train and the railroad. 10,000 tons would be a heavy for a manifest, stack or intermodal train, but light for coal, grain and other types of unit trains. 10,000 tons would be very heavy for a lot of shortlines, and typical of a class 1 railroad. Ted Curphey Ontario, OR Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/07/12 23:18 by funnelfan. [ Reply To This Message ] [ Quote ] Date: 01/07/12 23:26 Re: How Heavy is a Heavy Train Author: pmack Wasn't that Australian train BHP put together something like 682 cars and around 99,700 "tonnes"? I guess I could just google it: 682 cars 8 AC6000 locomotives 110,000 US tons 4.4 miles, 7.353km [ Reply To This Message ] [ Quote ] Date: 01/08/12 00:14 Re: How Heavy is a Heavy Train Author: mapboy The February, 2012 "Trains" follows a 31,955-ton iron ore train on the Quebec North Shore & Labrador that's "nearly 1,000 tons less than the average 'Carol LaKe long'". mapboy [ Reply To This Message ] [ Quote ] Date: 01/08/12 00:29 Re: How Heavy is a Heavy Train Author: imrl Your typical Powder River coal train consisting of 133 cars is around 19,000 tons. The heaviest train I have personally had was in the 22,500 ton range. It was a Powder River loaded coal train consisting of about 145 cars heading for West Labadie, MO. Manifest trains can vary widely depending upon train make up (loads/empties). I have had some that have pushed nearly 18,000 tons. [ Reply To This Message ] [ Quote ] Date: 01/08/12 00:38 Re: How Heavy is a Heavy Train Author: SD70M Those OGEX trains to Red Rock load up to 150 cars, running in 2+2 formation. I usually see these trains when I come over, at Kansas City although last time things were all screwed up by the major flooding on the Mo River. [ Reply To This Message ] [ Quote ] Date: 01/08/12 05:16 Re: How Heavy is a Heavy Train Author: shoretower When I was consulting for Burlington Northern in the early 1990s, the more-or-less standard Powder River coal trains were 120 cars, about 16,000 tons, but that was before the widespread use of distributed power. In those days, power was either three or five SD40-2s and a pair of manned helpers over a couple of grades in Wyoming. The heaviest train I've ever ridden was a 180-car iron ore train from Kelly Lake, MN to the docks at Allouez. The train grossed 22,000 tons and was pulled by three SD40-2s. Again, stack trains in the 1990s tended to be 21 five-unit platforms, grossing around 8,000 tons. Since then, as noted in other posts, trains have gotten much heavier. I understand that 30 to 35 five-unit well cars is no longer unusual for stack trains, and both UP and BNSF have pushed coal train weights up toward 20,000 tons. Widespread use of distributed power is one thing that has made this possible. [ Reply To This Message ] [ Quote ] Date: 01/08/12 07:07 Re: How Heavy is a Heavy Train Author: HogBoyJr Here's something to think about..... Trains are very heavy in comparison to what was running around in 1900, but the braking systems on freight cars and technology used for braking are pretty much the same was what they had in 1900. A cylinder and piston that pushes/pulls rods to make friction brake shoes push against the tread of a railcar wheel. That's it. Passenger cars have at lease advanced somewhat with the use of disc brakes and anti-lock systems. Freight cars need a serious upgrade. Any train no matter how heavy can get up and moving, stopping is always a challenge. [ Reply To This Message ] [ Quote ] Date: 01/08/12 08:35 Re: How Heavy is a Heavy Train Author: Cole42 HogBoyJr Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Here's something to think about..... > > > Trains are very heavy in comparison to what was > running around in 1900, but the braking systems on > freight cars and technology used for braking are > pretty much the same was what they had in 1900. A > cylinder and piston that pushes/pulls rods to make > friction brake shoes push against the tread of a > railcar wheel. That's it. > > Passenger cars have at lease advanced somewhat > with the use of disc brakes and anti-lock systems. > > > Freight cars need a serious upgrade. > > Any train no matter how heavy can get up and > moving, stopping is always a challenge. Interesting point. But looking from the outside, wouldn't extended-range dynamic brakes along with the distributed power kinda offset somewhat the lack of technological advances in air brakes? And on that note, do you use the distributed power's dynamics to assist the head end? Because if not I guess that blows my thought out of the water... [ Reply To This Message ] [ Quote ] Date: 01/08/12 08:39 Re: How Heavy is a Heavy Train Author: CN_Hogger I had a grain train several years ago that topped 19,500 tons. It ran pretty well, just not fast. It was also 'conventional'. CN_Hogger [ Reply To This Message ] [ Quote ] Date: 01/08/12 10:06 Re: How Heavy is a Heavy Train Author: calzephyr48 The drag freight is not dead. It would appear that with these 'advances' the average speed of the trains is actually slowing down. This is progress?? Of course it's yet another reason that the freight lines aren't interested in upgrading to accommodate faster passenger trains. They don't fit well in the mix. [ Reply To This Message ] [ Quote ] Date: 01/08/12 10:08 Re: How Heavy is a Heavy Train Author: JLY Isn't gross train tonnage a function of length? Isn't length determined by keeping the train in one piece and keeping the brakes pumped off. [ Reply To This Message ] [ Quote ] Date: 01/08/12 11:20 Re: How Heavy is a Heavy Train Author: Pinlifter Today's BNSF coal trains through Colorado are all 2x2 120 cars. Most are 17,000 tons. Interesting how things haven't changed much. shoretower Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > When I was consulting for Burlington Northern in > the early 1990s, the more-or-less standard Powder > River coal trains were 120 cars, about 16,000 > tons, but that was before the widespread use of > distributed power. In those days, power was > either three or five SD40-2s and a pair of manned > helpers over a couple of grades in Wyoming. [ Reply To This Message ] [ Quote ] Date: 01/08/12 12:58 Re: How Heavy is a Heavy Train Author: sarailfan I've seen 170-car potash trains on CP's mainline, that works out to 23000 to 25000 tons, with 2x2x1 power, all ES44ACs and AC4400s. That's a heavy one, would have been interesting to see it go down Field Hill. Darren Boes Lethbridge AB [ Reply To This Message ] [ Quote ] Date: 01/08/12 14:06 Re: How Heavy is a Heavy Train Author: SierraRail Heaviest trains are 32,000 tons (244 cars) on the iron ore trains of Quebec, North Shore & Labrador, north, out of Sept Isles, Quebec, Canada. Three SD70Ace units move these monster trains; two up front and one 160 cars back (mid-train). [ Reply To This Message ] [ Quote ] Date: 01/08/12 14:28 Re: How Heavy is a Heavy Train? Author: HAMTURN Speaking of heavy trains,read the article in Feb. 2012 TRAINS about the 33,000ton Canadian ore trains. That's heavy. [ Reply To This Message ] [ Quote ] Date: 01/08/12 20:50 Re: How Heavy is a Heavy Train? Author: halfmoonharold For an eastern example, NS runs coal trains to Sandusky, Ohio up to 22,000 tons for two 4000 hp. DC units. There are occasional 3-unit trains in the 25,000 to 30,000 ton range. No, they don't move very fast, not much over 35 mph. N&W liked doing the same with what we now consider small 4-axle units, load them right up to the limit. [ Reply To This Message ] [ Quote ] Date: 01/09/12 04:19 Re: How Heavy is a Heavy Train Author: driver SierraRail Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Heaviest trains are 32,000 tons (244 cars) on the > iron ore trains of Quebec, North Shore & Labrador, > north, out of Sept Isles, Quebec, Canada. Three > SD70Ace units move these monster trains; two up > front and one 160 cars back (mid-train). That doesn't sound like much power for this kind of tonnage, I presume its all level permanent way? Steve [ Reply To This Message ] [ Quote ] Date: 01/09/12 09:02 Re: How Heavy is a Heavy Train Author: NYC6001 One would think the grades on the QNS&L must not be too steep. Consider this: Most grades are actually sags, or hogbacks with a stream at the bottom. If the train is long enough, the rear will be pushing downhill while the head end is climbing out of the sag. Keep the slack on the rear end with the DPU, and it's not all that bad. It's the knobs that can be trickiest, because you get a lot of tonnage pulling the rear half over the hill, which creates a stress point at the summit. That's why I enjoy the fact that I am a midwestern engineer that mostly works locals. Weed weasels are my greatest hazard! Anyway, to answer the question, "heavy trains" are typically over the 8000-10000 ton threshold in most places. But with high adhesion diesels and DPU, those may now be called middle weights on some main lines, where 16,000+ tons is a heavy train. Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/09/12 09:41 by NYC6001. [ Reply To This Message ] [ Quote ] Date: 01/09/12 11:14 Re: How Heavy is a Heavy Train Author: shoretower Sorry to post again on the same thread, but I want to comment on Pinlifter's observation that BNSF trains are still 120 cars. There are lots of factors that limit train size and weight. Capacity of the coal loadouts is one. If the silos only hold 16,000 or 17,000 tons of coal each, you're not going to gain much by trying to load a longer train. That's one factor that keeps the trains at 120 cars. The other is siding length. I was the guy that figured out BN could add five cars to the then-standard 115-car coal train, and move the longer train with the same power, and still be able to fit in the sidings. Lengthening sidings can get *very* expensive. Some railroads will run occasional monster trains, but what happens is that the monster is too long for any siding, so he just holds the main and everyone else gets out of the way. That's not a very efficient way to operate. Also, railroads fell for what I call "the great AC traction scam" back in the 1990s. They got excited about the fact that three SD70s could move the same size train as five SD40s. Well, that's true, but since they've only got 12,000 HP vs. 15,000, the train runs about 10% slower and takes that much longer to get over the road. Given that one issue railroads face is a capacity shortage, that's not a very reasonable approach. Again, Pinlifter notes that the coal trains now use *four* units, not three -- effectively throwing away most of the tractive effort advantage of AC traction but giving you 16,000 HP. It helps to remember that, while tractive effort starts trains, horsepower determines how fast they'll go. [ Reply To This Message ] [ Quote ] Pages: [ 1 ][ 2 ] [ Next ] Current Page:1 of 2 [ Share Thread on Facebook ] [ Search ] [ Start a New Thread ] [ Back to Thread List ] [ <Newer ] [ Older> ]
Page created in 0.0988 seconds

Tag » How Heavy Is A Train