switcher versus road engine

If there is, can it be kept somewhat simple without getting too bogged down in the nitty details?

 

thanks - walt

Yes. generally switchers have  a view from the cab OVER the hood areas whereas the road engine [due to the size of the prime mover] will not allow the cab to see over one end of the hood [as the end is as high as the cab]. There are exceptions a la Kennecott copper GP38's with extended cabs or ALCo Rs1's, Rs2's, and RS3's.

switcher

http://www.progressiverailroad...O-BRKVL-SWITCH09.jpg

road engine:

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/...348_cf9a2ef1c2_z.jpg

Usually switchers are smaller engines, and have less horsepower. Switchers are mainly assigned as yard engines but can be run on short line runs, and switchers may not have(not 100% sure on that) as large a fuel tank.

Road engines have larger horsepower and more axles. An example of a road engine would be an SD-45 up to an SD-90, or a U-36C. Or an FM Trainmaster.

Lee Fritz

not to muddle things, there are also Road Switchers, engines designed to perform both tasks.

Switchers:

EMD SW/NW series; Alco S series; Baldwin

Road engines:

EMD F/E series, later GP series; Alco FA/PA, RS11 & up; FM trainmasters; GE series

Road Switchers:

EMD GP7/9/15; Alco RS1-3.

there are more examples but I kept it brief.

In modern railroading, the lines between switcher and road engine can be pretty blurry.

A GP40, once a common road engine, can also be found doing switcher duties in a freight yard.

A MP15, a small yard switcher, can often be seen doing main line operations.

The LIRR used to use MP15's on their passenger trains.

Dont let their size fool you, they are still quite powerful.

Here is a picture of one moving a long intermodal train accross the bridge in Jacksonville, all by itself.

Interesting topic.  Where would the BL2 fit in - as a road switcher or something else?  I understand that BL stands for Branch Line.

That's an impressive photo of that switcher pulling the intermodal by itself.  Why are so many NW/SWs paired up?

As I recall crews didn't not want to use car body units like E or F units to switch because they were difficult to get on.  Road switchers were road units with corner step wells. Most of these units also had exterior walkways from the corner step wells to the cab. This changed because the narrow nose of the GP and SD style units offered the crew in the cab less protection in grade crossing accidents.  Newer units still have corner step wells, but a full width nose. The exterior walkways and low nose also improved visibility when switching. 

The BL1 and BL2 preceded the GP series of road switchers.  It was a good idea but a pain in the patootie to build.

I would also guess it was more difficult to maintain the either a GP or an F-unit.

Rusty

Road switchers were designed to bridge the gap between a yard switcher and a "road" unit.  Road units have larger high horsepower engines and more elaborate trucks designed for higher speeds.  The number of axles has more to do with the need for additional traction motors or a need to distribute weight over more axles to handle lighter weight tracks.

The first succesful road switcher was the ALCO RS 1.  It pretty much set the pattern foreverything  that followed.  Typical early road units were "cab" designs.  These were build up from stamped steel u channels welded together in truss structures to make a bridge.  The deck of the bridge was not a frame per se, the load was carried by the side trusses. These provided good ride and great visibilty only at the front of the engine and no place for brakeman or any other crew.  You couldn't see much going on behind you.

Yard switchers had small engines and built up box beam frames.  Great visibility but very poor protection.  They were not designed for speed or distance work.

A road switcher has a frame like a yard switcher, albeit longer, a large engine like a road unit, and road trucks.  It can be used for road work but can also be used as a switcher.  As the hp increased and the distance the engines were expected to cover increased the cabs were upgraded to allow the crew some additional comforts (including a potty).

Full width cowl units are basically road switchers with a full width metal cowling.  These are usually found on roads were the outside environment makes the typical narrow hood less attractive.  The crew can do minor repairs without going outside or move from unit to unit with less exposure to wind/rain/snow/sand.

Thanks all.

I thought the differences would be more numerous.  Basically it sounds like:

* type of trucks

* good viewing front and back

* horsepower

Maybe it just sounds limited to me because I asked you guys to keep it simple and you did.  Or maybe it's really not that complicated!

thanks - walt

Applied to both would be MU (Multiple Unit) capability.  Many SW units were MU capable used by short line Pennsylvania railroads to haul coal.  Using (4) to (6) units was not uncommon to get the horsepower needed.  Modern Road units could supply the same horsepower with  (2) or (3) units.  Multiple unit capability was not a standard feature and was added as an option.  Changes the whole picture of whether an SW unit was a yard switcher or a road hauling unit or both.  IMO Mike CT

Another difference would be that in most cases switchers did not have dynamic brakes. An exception familiar to Lionel collectors would be the postwar 614 Alaska RR switcher which sports a yellow dynamic brake housing just ahead of the cab.

Thanks all.

You know, I'm surprised because the Classic Trains article made it seem like when, was it Dither, "invented" the road switcher it was HUGE breakthru.  I was thinking that the road-switcher's creation must have been breakthru in technology and mechanical workings.

thanks - walt

It's Dilworth.  And the GP7 was a huge breakthrough for EMD.

Rusty

Well, back when I was a kid our local freight on the Lackawanna's Gladstone Branch was powered by a WWI-era 2-8-0.  With a multitude of lumber yards and coal dealers, it's activities certainly were those of a "road switcher".  In fact, it's eventual replacement (saddest day of my life) was a GP-7.

Now-a-days in Southern CA, BNSF pretty much uses whatever they have that's convienent. Most of our road swtichers are GP60M's. Some of our locals and road switchers even use the ES44's. Some because of on board cameras, GPS, and some because of the EPA. They were using GP30's and GP35's but no longer can because of the EPA restrictions in CA.

And the replacement of those VERY SAME GP7s* by the Conrail junque du jour was the saddest day of MY life.

*DL&W 951 series GP7s became EL 1270-1284, Road Class MFSE15D4.

Here's one of your friends at Summit:

http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/el/loco/dlw-s357agd.jpg

Here's my favorite GP7 at Utica, NY:

http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/el/loco/el1280ass.jpg

Thanks guys for contributing!

- walt

Of course there engines are designed for certain purposes by the manufacturer, but sometimes the railroads themselves used certain engines for jobs that they weren't originally designed for.  Case in point, an SW-1 with it's little 600hp, 6 cyl engine was certainly designed to be a true switch engine.  But the Milwaukee Road, operating several branch lines in Western Wisconsin and Eastern Iowa, would MU three SW-1's together to service those rather lightly built lines.   This 3-unit combination had sufficient power to pull a string of freights, but the actual axle loading was very light. There are many photos in existence of those three "pups" running through the countryside pulling short "patrol" freights in the 1950's on thorugh the 1980's.  They probably replaced light steam power of 2-8-0's, 4-6-0's and even 4-4-0's.

Paul Fischer