| Posted by Dana M. on March 30, 2023 | |
Interesting photo Sid, (Gary), however, I must disagree... After seeing this photo, I rather think this is a very nice and interesting looking locomotive, and it would have been different to see this model performing switching duty in rail yards. It stands out, for sure, and has an aesthetic profile. The one "downside" I can mention would be about those bulky, plain, unappealing trucks... ugh! I think that is the detracting factor for this unit.
|
| Posted by FSWood on March 30, 2023 | |
I'm going to note that I like the aesthetics of centercabs and then go on to say that if I were the company official responsible for purchasing locomotives, what my maintenance staff thought of the trucks would have priority over what anyone thought of the truck aesthetics. Also in that is while I personally like centercabs the only important and relevant factor is the question of does that locomotive in that configuration efficiently do what my company wants it to do.
|
| Posted by bradley on March 30, 2023 | |
I think I agree with Mr. Vaught. Give me an MP-15!
|
| Posted by Triplex on March 31, 2023 | |
I've puzzled for many years why major North American railroads strongly favored single-engine end-cab switchers while industrial railroads were equally accepting of double-engine center-cab designs. This distinction wasn't true worldwide.
|
| Posted by FSWood on March 31, 2023 | |
I'd wager that after there were standard road diesel hood units it had something to do with the single engine end cab configuration resembling the standard road diesels & maybe more to do with the single engine. When end cab switchers began there were no standard hood style road units. Might also be the superior view/visibility in at least one direction which the end cab offered. Am pretty sure I read things about that in the 1980s but the 1980s were 40 years ago.
|
| Posted by bradley on March 31, 2023 | |
Mr Wood has some valid points, but since we’re just railfans looking at pictures, I’ll go with looks!
|
|