I'm still learning the use of my Christmas present to myself, a Canon R. I took the opportunity to head east from Denver to look for some trains...
Photo #1- I caught this eastbound S Seattle - Omaha intermodal train just west of Akron, CO. He was running slower than I expected which made me think they had a throttle restriction for fuel economy.
Photo #2- This coal empty was put into the Bijou siding to meet the hot Z Chicago - Denver train. After the hotshot got by he continued to sit.... As the sun sank in the west the light really looked good and the engineer helped by turning his headlights on to help the scene.
It was a little chilly but the light was good. After the last shot I headed over to my favorite eating emporium for dinner before heading home. I'm very pleased with my new camera!
Both are great photos and the second is especially well done...congrats!!!
I like both photos Mojaveflyer. From my experience with diesel and dual fuel (diesel / gas) engines, maximum thermal (fuel) efficiency is achieved around 80-85% of full load so I doubt that reduced throttle in this case is to save fuel. I think the reduced throttle is more likely to be slippery rails, track restrictions or some other mechanical or electrical problem with the locos or rolling stock. Another possibility could be a temporary speed reduction due to a remote track-side wheel bearing temperature scanner. Regards, Richard.
DougS
Loc: Central Arkansas
Excellent photographs, excellent compositions!
Reduced throttle setting is common on the BNSF for fuel conservation. Some of the older units gulp fuel at 9 gallons per mile at full throttle. I can't speak for the newer units but each locomotive has a 4000 - 5000 gallon fuel tank. I've heard that with newer units BNSF eliminated one fuel stop for trains running from Los Angeles to Chicago. That's a lot of fuel!
Mojaveflyer wrote:
Reduced throttle setting is common on the BNSF for fuel conservation. Some of the older units gulp fuel at 9 gallons per mile at full throttle. I can't speak for the newer units but each locomotive has a 4000 - 5000 gallon fuel tank. I've heard that with newer units BNSF eliminated one fuel stop for trains running from Los Angeles to Chicago. That's a lot of fuel!
Thanks Mojaveflyer. Since you seem to have first hand knowledge of the BNSF operation I stand corrected and retract my reasons for other possible reasons for reduced throttle / speed. However in an effort to save face (a little) I repeat what I said about modern locomotive diesel engines peak efficiency occurring around 80-85% of full load. So I can understand the drivers throttling back to the most fuel efficient set point instead of running at full load / full throttle despite possibly taking a little longer to get to their destination. Since the cost of fuel is a major operating expense I can see why saving on fuel consumption would have priority over faster running.
llamb
Loc: Northeast Ohio
Take a bow! Those are really good.
~Lee
Thorny Devil wrote:
I like both photos Mojaveflyer. From my experience with diesel and dual fuel (diesel / gas) engines, maximum thermal (fuel) efficiency is achieved around 80-85% of full load so I doubt that reduced throttle in this case is to save fuel. I think the reduced throttle is more likely to be slippery rails, track restrictions or some other mechanical or electrical problem with the locos or rolling stock. Another possibility could be a temporary speed reduction due to a remote track-side wheel bearing temperature scanner. Regards, Richard.
I like both photos Mojaveflyer. From my experience... (
show quote)
If the computer is running the train - the computer can run in throttle 8 , but if the engineer is running the train he is only allowed to go to throttle 6.
Love both shots. Great calendar material for next year.
Mark
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.