Talk about careless corner cutting. America as a whole alongside its railroads was in a low spot in its history during the 60s and 70s that was impactful.
I've been in the home building business for 50 years. I remember a time in the 70's when some builders started to use aluminum wiring. But that got shut down pretty quick by building inspectors.
I was almost burned to death as a child in 1972. My parents bought a new mobile home in 1971. An electrical fire start in the middle of the night and almost killed me and my brother. Yes, aluminum wiring is very dangerous.
The price of copper was really high in the 60s-70s, and aluminum wire was really common in a lot of things during that time period. If you buy a house from that time range, make sure it doesn’t have aluminum wiring.
One of the main issues (which you could always add with a pop text in the video) is the expansion of aluminum as current passes through it. As such each heat/cool cycle loosens the connections throughout. That is why it has been banned in the US for residential house wiring as the loose connections increases local resistance, which creates the heat that causes the fires (most famously in "mobile homes") especially when compressors (A/C, refrigerators, etc) and resistance-based heating (bare wire space heaters of old) are involved. Distribution boxes burned their bus bars, circuit breakers overheated, plug outlets overheated and fires resulted.
Great episode! Technically Strasburg and the Long Island Railroad (my home railroad) have been operating continuously since the 19th century, but UP is much more well known, especially for massive engines like these (the LIRR doesn't even allow 6 axle power due to picking the points.)
You know the regular U50's should have been preserved instead of the U50C's since the U50C's were very problematic while the regular U50's were very succesfull
The big problem with Aluminum is its lack of spring. It tends to crack and break with vibration. Of course one thing you can count on in a diesel locomotive is vibration.
I’ve seen the UP “centennials” in operation, they were impressive! The reason they were retired was because they were hard on the rails. Doesn’t make much sense considering the size an weight of either the Big Boy or the Challenger.
Weight wouldn't be that much of a factor. OTOH the rigid wheelbase of a truck could cause it to try to widen the gauge of curves, and stress the switches. Big Boy definitely leans on rails with its flanges on curves.
The DDA40X's issue was not the weight of them. It was the 4 axle trucks causing excessive wear on rails as well as the wheels. But that being said, that is not why they were retired. They were retired because they were worn out and not economical to rebuild considering the change to lower horsepower units to allow for more flexibility. It makes a lot more sense to run 3-5 3,000 HP units vs a 6,600 HP unit with another loco or two. It gives you way more redundancy should mechanical issues arise and more options to getting the needed amount of power on trains.
@@AndrewTheRocketCityRailfan4014 Now the Chinese make General Electric appliances, Wabtec makes GE locomotives, and GE as many of us all once knew it no longer exists. Thanks for nothing, Neutron Jack and Circlejerk Jeffrey.
Kind of surprised there isn't a U50 or U50C trustfund organization like with the PRR T1. Although it's cool that they are building a new T-1 with an improved design, it's also kind of ridiculous that they are so infatuated with a flawed locomotive that wasn't exactly the most reliable or appealing to the general public. Whenever you mention a locomotive class or train to a casual, know-nothing person, they immediately think of the Big Boy, "the old school Amtrak locomotives" (F40PH), and the Shinkansen bullet trains.
Well N&W and C&O both said you are talking out of you ass about the T-1, as they had no issues with wheel slip or maintained when using one. Hell, N&W said it was better at maintaining speed and more efficient than the J.
Looking at the U50c they should have made it maybe even a Centipede locomotive with B-B-B-B-B wheel arrangement and then restrict it to lines forgiving to their weight... Or additionally used lighter materials wherever physically possible along with the long wheel arrangement. Just as an idea. Not good but better than this.
Have you done:- Nederlandse Spoorwagen's 1000 and 1100 classes, British Railways Class 28's, Class 23's and Class 17, the London and North Western Railways "Claughton" Class, the SNCF 8500, 17000, and 25500 classes (actually quite good, but were notorious for shaking from side to side, leading to drivers blacking them on an on and off basis), the CIE 001 Class, that had appalling engines, and even when they were re-engined were never quite right. There are others.....😉
Whomever thought it a good idea to run 600+ volts (and up to 900 amps) of electricity through aluminum wires clearly didn’t have the first clue about the laws of electricity, physics…..or anything for that matter. EMD suffered the same problems with their SD50s. Had to spend millions stripping out the aluminum wiring and replace it with copper.
Challenger ain’t a joke, I just chose to mention the 9000s and Big Boys since they were the largest non articulated and articulated locomotives respectively. Also didn’t want to cram too many words into my script for me to have to cram in that single breath.
In my opinion I think Union Pacific should give the u50c back to General Electric and have it strip all of the electric equipment and fit equipment from common 3 axle North American GE Universal series and I think if a u50c be preserved. A museum should put it in static display only but that my opinion.
With these 50 class loco’s I heard you referring to the bogeys lay out as being cc. That term is usually used for bogeys with 3 axels but only one traction motor. Such as diesel hydraulics or bogeys with coupling rods. The usual term is Co Co, these have 3 axels and 3 traction motors each. Same as for 2 axel bogeys, either BB or Bo Bo or 4 axel, DD or Do Do, great content, keep it up.🇦🇺
You are talking about UIC designations, those don't apply in the US. In the united states we use AAR (Association of American Railroads) designations for locomotives. The AAR does not use any of the terms you are talking about. A locomotive with two, 4 axle trucks (both powered) is B-B. A locomotive with two 3 axle trucks is C-C. 4 axle trucks is D-D, etc. The U50 had B+B-B+B designation. Meaning it had four, two axle trucks with a span bolter between each pair (which spreads the load over the pairs)
I know I'm just a layman but it seems stupid that they would even think about using an aluminum wiring. That is why it was banned from houses because it would melt and catch on fire inside the walls! And a house is not pulling a 100 train car load down a track. I hope someone had their ass handed to him for that one,
If they would've used different reinforced trucks and copper wiring, I wonder how they would've worked. That type of motor from the normal U50 are known for being crap
You definitely are opinionated and strong headed by your tone (a little anger maybe) engineering then, did not have computers like today to simulate fractures and other things that they can now before manufacture.
Also Andrew, What do you mean by a stupider design? You mean a worse design? I’m no English teacher myself but your grammar at this part makes no sense,
Stupider is a word... "Stupider is the comparative form of the adjective stupid. Because stupid is a two-syllable word, its comparative form can be created either by adding the suffix “-er” or by using more."
I think aluminum wiring was also used in some mobile homes circa 1970. Witness so many "trailer fires" in the 1980s.
My house still has aluminum wiring.
Talk about careless corner cutting. America as a whole alongside its railroads was in a low spot in its history during the 60s and 70s that was impactful.
I've been in the home building business for 50 years. I remember a time in the 70's when some builders started to use aluminum wiring. But that got shut down pretty quick by building inspectors.
I was almost burned to death as a child in 1972. My parents bought a new mobile home in 1971. An electrical fire start in the middle of the night and almost killed me and my brother. Yes, aluminum wiring is very dangerous.
Sometimes success can come from failures.
True, just look at the EMD SD60, the PRR Q2, or the GWR Castle class( the design of which took notes from the failure of the Great Bear).
The price of copper was really high in the 60s-70s, and aluminum wire was really common in a lot of things during that time period. If you buy a house from that time range, make sure it doesn’t have aluminum wiring.
Never knew that. Perhaps might explain why ALCO was foolish enough to use it for wiring in the C855. They were broke and about to go out of business
One of the main issues (which you could always add with a pop text in the video) is the expansion of aluminum as current passes through it. As such each heat/cool cycle loosens the connections throughout. That is why it has been banned in the US for residential house wiring as the loose connections increases local resistance, which creates the heat that causes the fires (most famously in "mobile homes") especially when compressors (A/C, refrigerators, etc) and resistance-based heating (bare wire space heaters of old) are involved. Distribution boxes burned their bus bars, circuit breakers overheated, plug outlets overheated and fires resulted.
I didn’t know about that stuff yet, but I’ll be gaining some knowledge like that in the next year to come in college
Great episode! Technically Strasburg and the Long Island Railroad (my home railroad) have been operating continuously since the 19th century, but UP is much more well known, especially for massive engines like these (the LIRR doesn't even allow 6 axle power due to picking the points.)
The U50's sure make awsome O Gauge engines, I own 2 of them, thanks MTH TRAINS😊
You know the regular U50's should have been preserved instead of the U50C's since the U50C's were very problematic while the regular U50's were very succesfull
I don’t think any of either class survive.
The U50s weren't all that successful. They faired slightly better, but were apparently difficult to maintain.
The big problem with Aluminum is its lack of spring. It tends to crack and break with vibration. Of course one thing you can count on in a diesel locomotive is vibration.
Suggestion for “Dead On Arrival” Baldwin Centipede
I’m considering it for episode 6, after I do episode 5 on the ALCO C855
I’ve seen the UP “centennials” in operation, they were impressive! The reason they were retired was because they were hard on the rails. Doesn’t make much sense considering the size an weight of either the Big Boy or the Challenger.
Weight wouldn't be that much of a factor. OTOH the rigid wheelbase of a truck could cause it to try to widen the gauge of curves, and stress the switches. Big Boy definitely leans on rails with its flanges on curves.
The DDA40X's issue was not the weight of them. It was the 4 axle trucks causing excessive wear on rails as well as the wheels. But that being said, that is not why they were retired. They were retired because they were worn out and not economical to rebuild considering the change to lower horsepower units to allow for more flexibility. It makes a lot more sense to run 3-5 3,000 HP units vs a 6,600 HP unit with another loco or two. It gives you way more redundancy should mechanical issues arise and more options to getting the needed amount of power on trains.
good show
Oh wow! Happy b-day the rocketcityrailfan
UP is also MY fave railroad in all america.
Nice
First diesel in the series
7:28 - LMFAO!!!! I'll take note of that!
GE also made appliances
They get their tentacles into everything, and they've been doing it for over a century, even when GE transportation became part of Wabtec in 2019
@@AndrewTheRocketCityRailfan4014 Now the Chinese make General Electric appliances, Wabtec makes GE locomotives, and GE as many of us all once knew it no longer exists. Thanks for nothing, Neutron Jack and Circlejerk Jeffrey.
Kind of surprised there isn't a U50 or U50C trustfund organization like with the PRR T1. Although it's cool that they are building a new T-1 with an improved design, it's also kind of ridiculous that they are so infatuated with a flawed locomotive that wasn't exactly the most reliable or appealing to the general public. Whenever you mention a locomotive class or train to a casual, know-nothing person, they immediately think of the Big Boy, "the old school Amtrak locomotives" (F40PH), and the Shinkansen bullet trains.
Well N&W and C&O both said you are talking out of you ass about the T-1, as they had no issues with wheel slip or maintained when using one.
Hell, N&W said it was better at maintaining speed and more efficient than the J.
Shame neither orginal u50 or dd35 preserved. But I am happy we have 13 dda40x centennials preserved.
no music
Looking at the U50c they should have made it maybe even a Centipede locomotive with B-B-B-B-B wheel arrangement and then restrict it to lines forgiving to their weight... Or additionally used lighter materials wherever physically possible along with the long wheel arrangement. Just as an idea. Not good but better than this.
I kinda like the U50C because of the nose. it looks nice.
The U50 also had that nose too.
@@AndrewTheRocketCityRailfan4014 Maybe both should've been preserved.
It’s like the American version of boco
You should do a video on the prr ff1
I do wonder, how do you feel about locomotives that aren’t very good that get preserved?
I also hate the U50C but I like the U50 but they need a 4 wheel truck
Need more flexible Bo-Bo-Bo-Bo arrangement, which gives a much sweeter ride, and is more rail friendly.
Have you done:- Nederlandse Spoorwagen's 1000 and 1100 classes, British Railways Class 28's, Class 23's and Class 17, the London and North Western Railways "Claughton" Class, the SNCF 8500, 17000, and 25500 classes (actually quite good, but were notorious for shaking from side to side, leading to drivers blacking them on an on and off basis), the CIE 001 Class, that had appalling engines, and even when they were re-engined were never quite right. There are others.....😉
Whomever thought it a good idea to run 600+ volts (and up to 900 amps) of electricity through aluminum wires clearly didn’t have the first clue about the laws of electricity, physics…..or anything for that matter. EMD suffered the same problems with their SD50s. Had to spend millions stripping out the aluminum wiring and replace it with copper.
Weren't the high axle loads pretty damaging to the track too?
I guess that's why U50Cs never made it to preservation
0:40 the largest locomotives to ever exist. UP Challenger: Am I a joke to you.
big boy is larger than a challenger
Challenger ain’t a joke, I just chose to mention the 9000s and Big Boys since they were the largest non articulated and articulated locomotives respectively. Also didn’t want to cram too many words into my script for me to have to cram in that single breath.
I live in the uk that's why I said American train not favourite train
In my opinion I think Union Pacific should give the u50c back to General Electric and have it strip all of the electric equipment and fit equipment from common 3 axle North American GE Universal series and I think if a u50c be preserved. A museum should put it in static display only but that my opinion.
Goodbye Kyle Strasbourg
Ever plan to build the general electric universal 50s out of Lego?
You get a bit 'shout' like when excited....take breath.
Do the SDF40P
With these 50 class loco’s I heard you referring to the bogeys lay out as being cc. That term is usually used for bogeys with 3 axels but only one traction motor. Such as diesel hydraulics or bogeys with coupling rods. The usual term is Co Co, these have 3 axels and 3 traction motors each. Same as for 2 axel bogeys, either BB or Bo Bo or 4 axel, DD or Do Do, great content, keep it up.🇦🇺
You are talking about UIC designations, those don't apply in the US. In the united states we use AAR (Association of American Railroads) designations for locomotives. The AAR does not use any of the terms you are talking about. A locomotive with two, 4 axle trucks (both powered) is B-B. A locomotive with two 3 axle trucks is C-C. 4 axle trucks is D-D, etc. The U50 had B+B-B+B designation. Meaning it had four, two axle trucks with a span bolter between each pair (which spreads the load over the pairs)
I know I'm just a layman but it seems stupid that they would even think about using an aluminum wiring. That is why it was banned from houses because it would melt and catch on fire inside the walls! And a house is not pulling a 100 train car load down a track. I hope someone had their ass handed to him for that one,
If they would've used different reinforced trucks and copper wiring, I wonder how they would've worked. That type of motor from the normal U50 are known for being crap
Better you ask expert advice re Cu vs Al for power wiring, most especially concerning effects of oxidation.
I saw hhp8 in the intro so YOU HATE MY FAVORITE AMERICAN TRAIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You definitely are opinionated and strong headed by your tone (a little anger maybe) engineering then, did not have computers like today to simulate fractures and other things that they can now before manufacture.
Also Andrew, What do you mean by a stupider design? You mean a worse design? I’m no English teacher myself but your grammar at this part makes no sense,
Stupider is a word...
"Stupider is the comparative form of the adjective stupid. Because stupid is a two-syllable word, its comparative form can be created either by adding the suffix “-er” or by using more."
@@tim3172 Oh, Thank you. I thought he made that word up.
I didn’t click on this to hear a pompous kid rant at engineers calling them stupid. My mistake.
And yet you’re here
Skill issue lil bro