#emd f unit

[apoorconductor]

TTTT 7: A pair of legends in the diesel-electric world! B&O's EMD EA/EB #51, the first streamlined diesel engine in history; and NH's FL9 #2059, the last in a line of over 7,600 units in the EMD F family. The latter of these engines never received its own B variant, but in order to let it run through the underground tunnels to NY Grand Central, it was fitted with electrical equipment, third-rail contact shoes, and an extra rear axle to carry them!

[ethangbb]

[railwayhistorical]

Covered Wagons: A Series

This is a southbound freight on the Chicago & Alton, later GM&O, then ICG at the time of the photograph. The location is Shirley, Illinois, just south of Bloomington.

Bloomington was known as a haven for F-units in the mid- to late-1970s. I was able to photograph the so-called covered wagons several times before the charismatic locomotives were ether scrapped or sold off (most in 1977). A couple went to the MBTA: they were rebuilt and served commuter trains in the Boston area.

Four EMD F3s are seen here powering this train headed south toward East St. Louis. I followed the train and will post additional images in subsequent posts.

One image by Richard Koenig; taken November 21st 1976.

[guerrerense]

Portland Union Station por James Belmont Por Flickr: Doug Harrop Photography • May 22, 1975 On warm sunny May 22, 1975 evening, Doug was in Portland, Oregon. He managed to grab this great photo of various EMD locomotives on the ready track, including Burlington Northern F3A No. 676. Apparently, this production F3A is unofficially referred to as an "F5A" since it has the body of an F7A. The stylish F-unit was built Great Northern F3A No. 306A in October 1948. By 1952 was renumbered GN 458A to complete a four unit set, coupled with a new F7B. By 1969 it was repainted in Sky Blue paint. After the 1970 BN merger, it became BN 676, and would be officially retired from the roster in December 1980. pnwr.qstation.org/BNTribute/GN/F3A/BN_676.html

[aryburn-trains]

Conrail FL9 5059, built in 1960 as New Haven 2059, was the last of the 7,612 F-units built by EMD. It headed up a Croton-Harmon to Poughkeepsie shuttle sandwich at the Garrison, NY, station. August, 1981

[usafphantom2]

Next Generation Air Dominance Fighter Competition Has Begun

Joseph TrevithickPUBLISHED May 18, 2023 3:39 PM EDT

Next Generation Air Dominance Fighter Competition Has Begun

Lockheed Martin

The U.S. Air Force has released a classified contract solicitation for the engineering and manufacturing phase of the development of a new stealth six-generation crewed tactical jet. The effort is part of the service's larger Next Generation Air Dominance modernization initiative, or NGAD. The future NGAD combat jet is expected to be a direct successor to the F-22 Raptor stealth fighter, but serve in a much more expansive role than its predecessor.

Competition to win this contract will be immensely heated as it could very well be the last advanced manned tactical fighter-like aircraft built for the United States Air Force.

The Air Force announced the solicitation in a press release today. Secretary of the Air Force Frank Kendall had said the NGAD combat jet was entering its engineering and manufacturing development (EMD) phase last June. Kendall's comments were followed by the announcement of an Inspector General investigation into the maturity of the NGAD combat jet program. He clarified last September that it had not formally reached that milestone. At least one demonstrator design has already been flying for years now and Kendall has said in the past that this program has leveraged advanced experimental design work dating back at least to 2015.

An artist's conception of an advanced sixth-generation combat jet. Collins Aerospace Collins Aerospace

"The NGAD Platform is a vital element of the Air Dominance family of systems which represents a generational leap in technology over the F-22, which it will replace," Secretary of the Air Force Frank Kendall said in a statement accompanying the press release. "NGAD will include attributes such as enhanced lethality and the ability to survive, persist, interoperate, and adapt in the air domain, all within highly contested operational environments. No one does this better than the U.S. Air Force, but we will lose that edge if we don't move forward now."

Details about exactly what the Air Force is looking for in this aircraft remain limited. Who may be expected to submit proposals is unknown, though the general expectation is that Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and Boeing will be at the center of the forthcoming competition.

A screen capture from a Northrop Grumman promotional video showing a rendering of an advanced combat jet concept, at left, among other aircraft. Northrop Grumman capture

"This solicitation release formally begins the source selection process providing industry with the requirements the DAF expects for NGAD, as the future replacement of the F-22," according to today's press release. "Further information on the NGAD Platform's technical and programmatic details are classified to protect operational and technological advantages."

"The NGAD acquisition strategy will invigorate and broaden the industrial base to deliver rapid and innovative warfighting capabilities," it adds. "The strategy incorporates lessons learned from recent Air Force acquisition programs and will leverage open architecture standards. This approach will enable the government to maximize competition throughout the life cycle, provide a larger, more responsive industry base and drastically reduce maintenance and sustainment costs."

Secretary Kendall has said in the past that he expects the NGAD combat jets to be very exquisite platforms that will cost "multiple hundreds of millions of dollars" apiece. Broadband stealth, advanced electronic and other "spectral" warfare capabilities – which you can read more bout in detail here – and significant range and payload capabilities are all likely to be central components of the design. The broader NGAD initiative also contains programs focused on the development of advanced drones with high degrees of autonomy, as well as new jet engines, weapons, electronic warfare suites, sensors, battle management capabilities, and other systems.

An infographic giving a basic overview of NGAD-related efforts. NGAD is the centerpiece of what the Air Force is also calling Operational Imperative 4, one of seven such focus areas that Secretary Kendall has laid out. USAF

The expectation has also already long been that these aircraft would supplant the Air Force's F-22s and take on their roles, including acting as stealthy "quarterbacks" for managing major air operations in highly contested areas. That the NGAD combat jet will play this latter role was reinforced last year when Secretary Kendall announced that the Air Force was planning around a purchase of 200 NGAD aircraft, as well as at least 1,000 drones called Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA). The initial 1,000 drone figure was based around a concept of operation wherein two of them would be paired with each of the 200 NGAD jets, as well as 300 stealthy F-35A Joint Strike Fighters. The CCA program is another part of NGAD.

From a contracting perspective, there are clear indications that the Air Force is looking to avoid making the same kinds of mistakes it has made with other high-profile aircraft acquisition programs in the past, especially the F-35A. Kendall has publicly spoken about his interest in being able to secure more data rights in order to be less beholden to the original equipment manufacturer for follow-on upgrade and sustainment deals.

That, together with the relatively low expected production volume and high unit for the NGAD combat jet, could lead to intense competition for the EMD deal, but then greater focus on the part of winning and losing contractors afterward on various other NGAD projects — especially the CCA program. While the Air Force is planning right now around acquiring at least 1,000 CCAs all of one type, Secretary Kendall has left the door open there for purchases of hundreds, if not thousands more of drones of multiple types to meet the services needs in this regard. The final number of manned NGAD airframes is likely to fluctuate as well as the program progresses.

Multiple contractors, small and large, will have to collaborate on the final NGAD design, no matter what company is chosen to lead the development.

Another rendering of a sixth-generation combat jet, depicted here firing a directed energy weapon. The development of lasers and other direct energy weapons is another aspect of the broader NGAD program. Northrop Grumman

The Air Force hopes to award the NGAD Platform EMD phase contract sometime next year. The service officials have said in the past that the hope is that actual NGAD combat jets will begin entering operational service before the end of the decade. This ambitious schedule further points to significant research and development work having already been done.

In its 2024 Fiscal Year budget request, the Air Force is asking for $276 million to help with risk reduction work on the crewed NGAD combat jet. This is part of the $1.93 billion in NGAD funding the Air Force is looking to receive in the next fiscal cycle. This notably does not include some elements of the broader initiative, including separate funding streams for CCA and the Next Generation Adaptive Propulsion (NGAP) engine program.

How the NGAD platform EMD contract award impacts the U.S. Navy's separate work on an advanced sixth-generation combat jet on its own NGAD program is an open question. The two services have distinct requirements for their next-generation tactical aircraft, but they are both working closely together on various aspects of their programs. For instance, both NGAD platforms will be able to control each other's CCAs via a common communications architecture. Deep cooperation is also going on with many other facets of the programs. While the airframes may end up looking different, sub-systems, coatings and more will likely be shared, at least to some degree. The Navy has its own program in place to develop what it is referring to as F/A-XX, which looks set to expand dramatically in the next year.

A Boeing rendering of a sixth-generation combat jet for the Navy. Boeing Boeing

All this being said, the manned NGAD platform is still expected to become the centerpiece of the Air Force's future tactical combat jet fleets for years to come and it will also be coupled with the Long Range Strike family of systems, of which the B-21 is the centerpiece. Now the Air Force has taken the next big step toward making this aircraft a reality.

[collinthenychudson]

Day 23: EMD SDP40F

Info from Wikipedia:

The EMD SDP40F was a six-axle 3,000 hp (2.2 MW) C-C diesel–electric locomotive built by General Motors Electro-Motive Division (EMD) from 1973–1974. EMD built 150 for Amtrak, the operator of most intercity passenger trains in the United States. Amtrak, a private company but funded by the United States government, had begun operation in 1971 with a fleet of aging diesel locomotives inherited from various private railroads. The SDP40F was the first diesel locomotive built new for Amtrak and for a brief time they formed the backbone of the company's long-distance fleet.

A series of derailments in the mid-1970s shattered Amtrak's confidence in the locomotive, and many railroads banned it from their tracks. Multiple investigations pointed to issues with the locomotive's trucks, the weight of the water and steam generators used for train heating, or the harmonic vibration of baggage cars behind the locomotive. In 1977 Amtrak decided to move on from the SDP40F in favor of the EMD F40PH, which was already in use on short-distance routes. Amtrak traded most of its fleet into EMD; the components were incorporated into new F40PHs. The remainder were traded to the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway (ATSF) for use in freight service. The Santa Fe rebuilt the locomotives and designated them SDF40-2. The Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway (BNSF), successor to the Santa Fe, retired them in 2002. One of them is preserved.

Amtrak assumed operation of most intercity rail passenger service in the United States on May 1, 1971. Until then such services were operated by various private railroads. The private railroads chose to retain their second generation passenger locomotives for freight service, or to operate the various commuter services which, by law, did not pass to Amtrak. To operate these intercity services the Amtrak had to buy or lease from the private railroads whatever locomotives remained. This left Amtrak with an aging and mechanically-incompatible fleet of diesel locomotives. The mainstays of Amtrak's road diesel fleet were veteran E units and F units, which were 10–20 years old and due for replacement.

The SDP40F was a full-width cowl unit. It was based on the EMD FP45 passenger locomotive and EMD SD40-2 freight locomotive. All three shared the EMD 645E3 diesel prime mover, which developed 3,000 hp (2.2 MW). The locomotive had a gear ratio of 57:20. Maximum speed at full horsepower was 94 mph (151.3 km/h); the locomotive exceeded 100 miles per hour (160.9 km/h) in tests. There were doubts at the time about Amtrak's long-term viability, so the locomotives were designed for easy conversion to freight locomotives should Amtrak cease operation.

In the early 1970s Amtrak's passenger car fleet was steam-heated; Amtrak's requirement called for two steam generators. These were located at the rear of the locomotive. Forward of the generators was a 1,350-US-gallon (5,110.3 l; 1,124.1 imp gal) water tank. This tank rested above the floorline. The lateral motion of the water within was later implicated in several derailments. The primary underbody tank was split between water and diesel fuel, carrying 2,150 US gallons (8,138.6 l; 1,790.2 imp gal) of water and 2,500 US gallons (9,463.5 l; 2,081.7 imp gal) of diesel. Provision was made for eventual conversion to head-end power (HEP), but it was never carried out.

EMD based the SDP40F name on the existing SDP40. Several years earlier, EMD had made similar versions of the SDP45 and SD45 in a full-width cowl unit, which it named FP45 and F45. Although the SDP40F was externally nearly identical to the FP45, EMD chose not to give the new locomotive a similar name such as FP40. EMD wanted to avoid adding a new locomotive type to their catalog due to price controls in effect in the early 1970s. The following year, the F40C name was used for a similar locomotive ordered by the Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad (the "Milwaukee Road"), equipped with HEP instead of steam generators.

There were several minor differences between the first 40 locomotives built and later examples. The most important was the installation of lower-profile cooling fans and air horns to avoid clearance problems in the Eastern US. Amtrak ordered 150 SDP40Fs, in two batches. The first order, placed on November 2, 1972, was for 40 locomotives, at a cost of $18 million. A second order, for 110 locomotives at $50 million, followed on October 12, 1973. These orders were Amtrak's first for new-build locomotives.[18] Amtrak deployed the original 40 locomotives on long-distance trains in the Western United States. The locomotives entered revenue service on June 22, 1973, hauling the Super Chief from Chicago to Los Angeles over the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway. SDP40Fs were also used on the Burlington Northern Railroad. The arrival of the second order enabled Amtrak to deploy the SDP40Fs throughout the country, displacing the inherited E-units.

In late 1975 J. David Ingles called the SDP40Fs the "stars of Amtrak's long-distance trains," but engine crews reported that the locomotives rode poorly compared to the E-units they had replaced. Even as Amtrak and EMD investigated the ride quality, the SDP40F was involved in a series of derailments that would lead to an end to its career as a passenger locomotive. Between 1974–1976 the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) identified thirteen incidents for which the locomotive was responsible. None of the incidents were serious, but their frequency was a concern. Most of the derailments occurred on trains with two SDP40Fs on the front and at least one trailing baggage car. While the rear truck of the second locomotive and the front truck of the baggage car were pinpointed as the source of the derailment, the actual cause of the derailments was unclear.

EMD, Amtrak, the Association of American Railroads (AAR), and the FRA tested the locomotive thoroughly, with suspicion falling on the "hollow bolster" truck design. In the end, the investigators theorized that the steam generators and water tank may have made the rear of the engine too heavy and created too much lateral motion. Later FRA investigations concluded that the actual culprit was the light weight of the baggage cars, which caused harmonic vibrations when placed directly behind the much heavier SDP40F. A contributing factor was the sometimes poor quality of track the locomotive operated over.

Amtrak took several corrective measures, including operating with a reduced speed on curves, emptying the smaller of the two water tanks to reduce lateral motion, and making various alterations to the trucks. The measures helped, but the trouble continued. Several railroads, including the Burlington and the Chesapeake and Ohio Railway (C&O), banned the "rail breakers" from their tracks (they were suspected or known to be causing the spreading of rails because of their lateral swaying, which may have contributed to the derailments)[citation needed]. For the Chicago–Seattle Empire Builder, the speed restrictions added 6 hours to what had been a 46-hour schedule. Another important development was the unusually harsh winter of 1976–1977, which sidelined many of Amtrak's aging steam-heated coaches. Amtrak suspended numerous routes and pressed the new HEP-equipped Amfleet I coaches, designed for short runs, into service. The new EMD F40PH, intended for short-distance service and equipped with HEP, handled these trains.

In the spring of 1977 Amtrak faced a power crisis. In addition to the SDP40Fs derailing, Amtrak was having trouble with two other six-axle designs. The GE E60CP and E60CH electric locomotives were having derailment problems. The GE P30CH had the same truck design as E60s and rode poorly, although it did not exhibit the same tendency to derail. Amtrak decided to abandon the SDP40F in favor of the F40PH, a four-axle design with none of the riding problems of the six-axle locomotives. Amtrak traded 40 SDP40Fs back to EMD. Components including the prime mover were installed into an F40PH's frame. Between 1977–1987 Amtrak traded 132 of the SDP40Fs back to EMD for F40PHRs. The SDP40F remained in service on the Santa Fe longer than elsewhere, although the arrival of HEP-equipped Superliner cars on the Western routes displaced them from there as well. The last SDP40Fs left the Amtrak roster in 1987. The remaining Amtrak SDP40F's that weren't sold to the ATSF (seen below) are presumed to have been scrapped.

In 1984 Amtrak, low on light-duty power, traded 18 SDP40Fs to the Santa Fe for 43 switchers: 25 CF7s and 18 SSB1200s. Santa Fe rebuilt the traded locomotives for freight use. Modifications included removing the steam generators and regearing for lower speed. The locomotives were also given front steps and platforms, and notched noses in order to improve boarding access. The rebuilt locomotives were designated SDF40-2. The SDF40-2s continued in service with the BNSF Railway, successor to the Santa Fe, until their retirement in 2002.

One SDF40-2, ex-Amtrak No. 644, was acquired by Dynamic Rail Preservation Inc. and is in Boulder City, Nevada having been previously displayed in Ogden, Utah. It has been renumbered to its Santa Fe-era 6976 number and returned to operation in November 2019.

models and route by: American Trainz Group, trainzman54, Auran, and Download Station

[trainsinanime]

So I have a love/hate relationship with New York Central streamlined steam locomotives, mostly hate. However I have been eyeing a 20th Century Limited set and if I did get it, I'd probably also get a Dreyfus Hudson to go with it at some point. And they are the most iconic of the Central's streamliners. I'd also consider the Mercury since it was local to where I live. Not the Empire State Express though, I hate the nose on those.

Yeah, those are nice trains! I had to look up the Empire State Express, and I agree, that one's not really convincing. Looks like the NW 601 with random steel fluting applied. I can sort of appreciate the idea of making the locomotive match the Budd steel cars, kind of like the EMD E5 of the Burlington, but the end result doesn't really come together for me.

Kato is selling the Empire State Express in N scale, but only EMD E7s to go with it. Nice locomotives, don't get me wrong, but I have more than enough E and F units as it is, the urge to get more isn't super strong. At least not until I manage to build some more tracks so I can run my trains again. I have one table for that in my small apartment and it's mostly full with other stuff at the moment…

[janetushar1]

Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Market to Hit $34.36 Billion by 2032

The global Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Market was valued at USD 25.90 Billion in 2024 and it is estimated to garner USD 34.36 Billion by 2032 with a registered CAGR of 3.6% during the forecast period 2024 to 2032.

The report throws light on the competitive scenario of the global Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Market to know the competition at global levels. Market experts also provided the outline of each leading player of the global Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Market for the market, considering the key aspects such as the areas of operation, production, and product portfolio. In addition, the companies in the report are studied based on vital factors such as company size, market share, market growth, revenue, production volume, and profit.

The global Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Market is fragmented with various key players. Some of the key players identified across the value chain of the global Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Market include Celgene Corporation, Acorda Therapeutics Inc., Biogen Inc., Actelion Pharmaceuticals (Johnson & Johnson), EMD Serono (Merck KGaA), Bayer AG, Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., Novartis AG., Sanofi, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. and others. etc. Considering the increasing demand from global markets various new entries are expected in the Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Market at regional as well as global levels.

Download Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Market Sample Report PDF: https://www.vantagemarketresearch.com/multiple-sclerosis-drugs-market-1859/request-sample

Top Competitors:

Celgene Corporation, Acorda Therapeutics Inc., Biogen Inc., Actelion Pharmaceuticals (Johnson & Johnson), EMD Serono (Merck KGaA), Bayer AG, Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., Novartis AG., Sanofi, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. and others.

Understanding the Industry's Growth, has released an Updated report on the Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Market. The report is mixed with crucial market insights that will support the clients to make the right business decisions. This research will help new players in the global Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Market to sort out and study market needs, market size, and competition. The report provides information on the supply and market situation, the competitive situation and the challenges to the market growth, the market opportunities, and the threats faced by the major players.

Regional Analysis

-North America [United States, Canada, Mexico]

-South America [Brazil, Argentina, Columbia, Chile, Peru]

-Europe [Germany, UK, France, Italy, Russia, Spain, Netherlands, Turkey, Switzerland]

-Middle East & Africa [GCC, North Africa, South Africa]

-Asia-Pacific [China, Southeast Asia, India, Japan, Korea, Western Asia]

You Can Buy This Report From Here: https://www.vantagemarketresearch.com/buy-now/multiple-sclerosis-drugs-market-1859/0

Full Analysis Of The Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Market:

Key findings and recommendations point to vital progressive industry trends in the global Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Market, empowering players to improve effective long-term policies.

The report makes a full analysis of the factors driving the development of the market.

Analyzing the market opportunities for stakeholders by categorizing the high-growth divisions of the market.

Questions answered in the report

-Who are the top five players in the global Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Market?

-How will the global Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Market change in the next five years?

-Which product and application will take the lion's share of the global Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Market?

-What are the drivers and restraints of the global Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Market?

-Which regional market will show the highest growth?

-What will be the CAGR and size of the global Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Market during the forecast period?

Read Full Research Report with [TOC] @ https://www.vantagemarketresearch.com/industry-report/multiple-sclerosis-drugs-market-1859

Reasons to Purchase this Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Market Report:

-Analysis of the market outlook on current trends and SWOT analysis.

-The geographic and country level is designed to integrate the supply and demand organizations that drive industry growth.

-Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Industry dynamics along with market growth opportunities in the coming years.

-Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Market value (million USD) and volume (million units) data for each segment and sub-segment.

1 year consulting for analysts along with development data support in Excel. Competitive landscape including market share of major players along with various projects and strategies adopted by players in the last five years.

Market segmentation analysis including qualitative and quantitative analysis including the impact on financial and non-economic aspects.

Complete company profiles that include performance presentations, key financial overviews, current developments, SWOT analyzes and strategies used by major Multiple Sclerosis Drugs Market players.

Check Out More Reports

Global Biopolymer Coatings Market:  Report Forecast by 2032

Global Alcohol Ingredients Market: Report Forecast by 2032

Global Mushroom Market: Report Forecast by 2032

Global Car Anti-Theft Devices Market: Report Forecast by 2032

Global Consumer Electronics Market: Report Forecast by 2032

[eltristanexplicitcontent]

EMD E-UNITS, F-UNITS, GP-9s and SD-9s

[rpidbf]

There are few things more awe-inspiring than the feeling of a turbocharged 2-stroke diesel V16 reverberating in your chest from 30 feet away. Walking around the inside of the long hood of a diesel is like walking inside the skeleton of a god.

EMD E and F units? The Baldwin sharknoses? These are not ugly locomotives. Even the boxy look of more modern diesels has a sort of industrial beauty to it. I am most partial to the SD40-2. The proportions work out perfectly to my eye.

You can’t make a like-for-like comparison between batteries and diesel because the difference in energy density means they can’t do the same kinds of jobs.

https://youtu.be/V0qcxyyllQ4?si=7OCAR4wDzIy-b06S

Hydrogen is is more interesting since the volume becomes unmanageable way before the weight does, and you have to either insulate it really well, or store it under extreme pressure, or both. It can work, and a handful of prototypes have been built to date. If it does catch on, it would be used to span the gaps between sections of electrified rail as they are built. But theres a lot that would need to happen before hydrogen trains start making logistical sense, and you can really only make a fair comparison between hydrogen and diesel by making a lot of assumptions about what future hydrogen infrastructure will look like. As things exist now, if you need to move a lot of weight a long distance over non-electrified rail, diesel is the best way to go.

I guess this is really just a roundabout way of saying that any claim of some technology being better or worse than some other technology is only meaningful if the bounds of that comparison are well-defined.

While there is a certain romance to steam locomotives, I see no reason to preserve the polluting, ugly, inefficient monsters we call diesel locomotives, electrified trains or hell even battery electrific and hydrogen are all better ways to power a train than diesel

[trainmaniac]

Light Engines, Heavy Snow by Vincent Colombo Via Flickr: During a heavy snowfall, CSX B727 is seen coming off of the Myles Standish lead in Taunton, MA. Until 1965, trains had a straight shot to Mansfield using the track to the right. The line now only extends about 1.5 miles to serve a couple customers in the industrial park, while the line to Attleboro is still intact.

[railwayhistorical]

Night into Dawn—Bloomington, Illinois

Bloomington was a haven for EMD F-units back in the mid- to late-1970s. I ventured over there from Indiana several times to shoot the "covered wagons" of the Gulf Mobile & Ohio, sometimes in the dark. The GM&O was part of the Illinois Central Gulf by that time, but engines weren't painted quickly after the merger took place in 1972, which was fabulous for railroad enthusiasts. [I believe two of the F3s did make it into the orange and white scheme of the ICG.]

We begin this little sequence of images with a view of number 810B: it's an F3 built in 1947. This unit would be upgraded to pull commuters for citizens of Boston, as MBTA 1111. [In the end, a few of these charismatic F-units went to Boston, a few others to Metro North, but I believe others were scrapped within a couple of years from the time of these photos being made.]

Despite the lure of the Fs, I was also attracted to this wonderful SD40, a so-called Redbird. This one was built in September of 1966. Lastly, number 811b is an EMD F7 built in 1949.

I love the beginnings of daylight in the eastern sky in these latter two images. Three photographs by Richard Koenig; taken at dawn on November 21st 1976.

[guerrerense]

_DSC4213PP1 por John Troxler Por Flickr: EMD F unit pot of gold. TP&W 1500 rests in the Logansport, IN yard Sunday morning, 07/21/96, in preparation for another day of Logansport's Iron Horse Festival passenger excursions running between Logansport and Burnettsville, IN on the TP&W line. A storm front was rapidly moving eastward which created a sunrise rainbow. Kodachrome 64.

[identifyingtrainsinposts]

[F->B] EMD - GP10, GP18

Note that the GP10 is a classification for a rebuild done by the Illinois Central to GP7s, 9s, & 18s. In this case, 8343 started life as a GP9.

also the caption says they're abandoned but there's guys in high vis vests in the lead unit 🤔

Abandoned train on a railway

[aryburn-trains]

The Face Of An F

MDOT F9PH #7182 rests quietly in Brunswick Yard on Saturday October 8, 1988. Soon the 7182 will be repainted into the new MARC scheme and renumbered to 82. The unit was built as a "phase ll" F7 by EMD for the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad in January 1952 and numbered 939. In 1957 the B&O renumbered their fleet of locomotives (including all remaining steam) into a four digit system with the 939 becoming the 4582. In December 1967, the B&O leased a few locomotives to the Central Railroad of New Jersey. The 4582 was one of the leased locomotives becoming CNJ #14. It was returned as B&O 4582, Class F-7A, in 1973. It was sold to Morrison Knudsen on April 4, 1975, and rebuilt as F9PH on January 29, 1981, as MDOT 7182. It was sold to Morrison Knudsen in 1994. It was sold as Washington Central RR 82 in November 1996 and wrecked in May 2002. It was rebuilt. It was sold as Santa Cruz & Monterrey Bay Ry 82 in November 2012.