(Video) Grinding Rail the Hard Way...

Wheres a Y6 when you need one?

SD70AH's?

Those SD40-2's might be in storeage now.

Got to see the Interstate heritage unit on the other train.

There are times when throttle position 2 pulls better than Run 6...or higher. This was one of those times. Every time she throttles up, the slip starts and the train stops. When she had the throttle in a low position (Run 2 or 3) the train would start moving with no wheel slip. Every time she throttled up, the slip started again and the train stopped.

There’s no question there was something wrong with the wheel slip circuit in that SD40, but I think an engineer with a bit more finesse on the throttle could have gotten this train moving without all the sparks and rail damage.

She incrased power because the LEADER control system told her too?

@Rich Melvin posted:

There are times when throttle position 2 pulls better than Run 6...or higher. This was one of those times. Every time she throttles up, the slip starts and the train stops. When she had the throttle in a low position (Run 2 or 3) the train would start moving with no wheel slip. Every time she throttled up, the slip started again and the train stopped.

There’s no question there was something wrong with the wheel slip circuit in that SD40, but I think an engineer with a bit more finesse on the throttle could have gotten this train moving without all the sparks and rail damage.

My thoughts exactly!  The difference between a throttle puller and an engineer... 

@Trainmaster04 posted:

Something that the OP didn't mention is that the engineer was fired after this event. Also, the comments also were accusing, the guy who made this video, the one who caused the firing of the engineer. After watching and reading I would say that it was both the trainmaster and the engineer were in fault.

Don't know what a Trainmaster would have to do with this, as Engineers report to a Road Foreman of Engines (Conductors report to a Trainmaster). Besides, Trainmasters don't have much to do with train consist make-up anyway.

I say this since the train was overloaded

How do you know it was "overloaded"?

and since the engineer tried to keep on going instead of calling for help or have the conductor report what was going on.

Maybe they did "call for assistance", and where told to keep going/trying.

 

Any traction motor damage?

@Trainmaster04 posted:

Something that the OP didn't mention is that the engineer was fired after this event. Also, the comments also were accusing, the guy who made this video, the one who caused the firing of the engineer.

This will give you some insight as to why real railroaders have a problem with railfans!

How many of you like someone looking over your shoulder just waiting for you to make a mistake, then run and tell the Boss?

I wonder if the "Wheel Slip" light was working in the lead unit (that is a train lined indication)?  Pretty hard to miss with that little light blinking on & off.

@Big Jim posted:

This will give you some insight as to why real railroaders have a problem with railfans!

How many of you like someone looking over your shoulder just waiting for you to make a mistake, then run and tell the Boss?

Very good point, Jim, and one that railfans never think about. The only reason this video got posted to YouTube was because of the "wow!" factor. The fact that the poster had to shut off comments is an indication of how toxic this kind of thing is.

I'm not sure I agree with her firing, if that really happened. Clearly there was something wrong with the wheelslip system on that SD40.

It is times like this that the shallowness of the training that new hires receive today becomes evident. These new engineers are OK if everything is working right. But as soon as something goes wrong, they're lost. This was a perfect example of that.

@Rich Melvin posted:

Very good point, Jim, and one that railfans never think about. The only reason this video got posted to YouTube was because of the "wow!" factor. The fact that the poster had to shut off comments is an indication of how toxic this kind of thing is.

I'm not sure I agree with her firing, if that really happened. Clearly there was something wrong with the wheelslip system on that SD40.

It is times like this that the shallowness of the training that new hires receive today becomes evident. These new engineers are OK if everything is working right. But as soon as something goes wrong, they're lost. This was a perfect example of that.

But are we not all railfans? I understand what you two mean but just giving food for thought.

@Trainmaster04 posted:

But are we not all railfans? I understand what you two mean but just giving food for thought.

Just my opinion but, there are railfans that are hobbyists, and then there are those that work in the railroad industry and also like trains as well as the job. Those individuals, might also be classified as "railfans", but they tend to know what they are doing and talking about when it comes to railroading.

OK, I call in Houston METRO bus operators who are driving the bus or treating passengers the wrong way.  But if an op is doing it right, or above the call, I not that also.

If the locomotive slipped once, well that is "manure happens".  Now, we do know if the woman communiated with her dispatch about the situation and what the DS told her if there were communications?

But the actions taken did ruin trackage, could have cause major damage to the locomotives, could have damaged or derailed cars in the train.  All big ticket items.  The shrugging did not help help her position.

Plus was this the first operating problem with this person.

Now, when I see a problem at METRO, I go to them first.  If they fix it, which they do, I keep it in house. 

Maybe the one filming the train, if it wad not done, was to send the vid to NS first, and see what they would do with it.  After that, then use social media.

One thing needs to be drilled into everybody.  You Tube, Face Book, and the whole internet is out there.  And once thete the message cannot be controlled.

@Dominic Mazoch posted:

"...do know if the woman communiated with her dispatch about the situation and what the DS told her if there were communications?..."

What in the world would calling the dispatcher accomplish? He can't do anything about this situation. This has absolutely nothing to do with the dispatcher.

It apparently happens more often than we think:

Rusty

OK, I'm talking to the lynch mob here! And, if you have a problem with my wording, suck it up!

I have had this same type of thing happen to me.
In all fairness to the engineer;
This did happen in full daylight!
When an engineer is starting a train, his/her concentration is focused on the ground to see if the train is moving. Those of you standing on the ground have no idea what noise is going on inside an SD40. The SD40 is not a quiet locomotive inside the cab. Pay attention at the beginning of the video when the wheels start sending sparks. There was no change in sound that would have alerted the engineer. What the cameraman heard on the ground is VERY different than what can be heard in the cab of a noisy engine.
Concentrating on the ground, one isn't looking behind. Even if the engineer had looked back, there was no smoke. The sparks seen are about two and a half feet underneath the sides of the locomotive cab. NOT easy to be seen, especially in daylight. Look again, I did not see any spark that cleared the side of the fuel tank!
When an engine picks up all of its wheels like that, the wheel slip feature doesn't function the way you would think. It is not really a fault of the system. It is more because all of the wheels are going the same speed! Remember, this isn't HI-AD technology!

One big thing that I did note. Whoever was filming this show never lifted their voice or ran over toward the train tell the crew that something was amiss behind the lead loco! Great folks railfans they turned out to be!!!

Does this mean the wheels are not synchronized?  How does a lash up work?

@Old Newbie posted:

Does this mean the wheels are not synchronized?  How does a lash up work?

The wheels all have traction control, they're supposed to sense when they don't have traction and are spinning, just like modern cars.

@Old Newbie posted:

Does this mean the wheels are not synchronized?  How does a lash up work?

No, the wheels are not “synchronized.” Each locomotive does the best it can in whatever throttle position is set by the engineer in the lead unit. Think of the throttle as a “power” adjustment, not a “speed” adjustment.

As for a “lash up” you start with a bunch of rope...

Not wanting to start an international war here, but can someone tell me why only one of the loco's in the consist suffer the "wheel slip"?

If it is a weight thing, starting to move a stationary freight train, wouldn't the wheels on all of the loco's start slipping due to the drag?

I'm just a poor boy from "down-under", and know nothing about "driving" a multi-diesel engine freight train, other than on my layout. This is the first time in my 66 yrs I have ever seen sparks coming off loco wheels. I kinda figured the wheels would have been shot after that amount of "grinding"!!!!

I look forward to someone (Hotwater in particular) explaining to me what is actually going on here.

Peter on the fabulous Gold Coast in sunny Queensland, Australia.

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

The wheels all have traction control, they're supposed to sense when they don't have traction and are spinning, just like modern cars.

John,
The SD40's didn't have "traction control" like today's HI-AD units. So, they don't work the way you think or want to think they work. Once all of those axles started slipping together, the wheel slip system of the day didn't see a wheel slip and thus didn't drop the load.

@Buco posted:

If it is a weight thing, starting to move a stationary freight train, wouldn't the wheels on all of the loco's start slipping due to the drag?

 

It doesn't work that way.
Normally one axle will start to slip first and the system will drop the load on that unit and the train will stall or if running, slow down until traction is regained. In the case of wet or greasy rail normally it is one of the first two axles on the lead truck because they are the first ones to hit the grease. Not all axles throughout the consist are going to be carrying the same amount of weight. This can depend on fuel load or curve elevation and then add in the pulling power of the number of units ahead. There are a lot of factors figuring into how much of a load is on each axle of each locomotive.

We used to have a problem with lost traction that the company never researched or if they did, they never told us about. The problem was that at times pulling a heavy train through some curves on the steepest grades, one of the units back in the consist would lose traction then suddenly regain it, then repeat again and again until either one you let off of the throttle or two the train broke in two. It was very violent lurching, like a bucking bronco. Most of the time easing off to the fifth notch would stop the lurching, but, if there was a weak knuckle near the head end, the train would break in two.
I asked many times to see the tapes from all of the units to see if I could tell exactly which unit was causing the problem, but, no avail. My supposition was that due to the strong pull of the head two units, the weight of the third unit was being lifted slightly off of the outside rail, causing the momentary lack of traction. And when traction was lost it came back down, regaining immediate traction. This all happening in a matter of split seconds. The "pucker factor" went sky high for a few moments until everything calmed down and you could start notching up again.

@Big Jim posted:

John,
The SD40's didn't have "traction control" like today's HI-AD units. So, they don't work the way you think or want to think they work. Once all of those axles started slipping together, the wheel slip system of the day didn't see a wheel slip and thus didn't drop the load.

Interesting fact, and would explain what is happening.  I was of the belief that newer locomotives had independent sensing on each axle, obviously the SD40 isn't a "newer" locomotive.   I gather they only sensed if there was a difference in speed of the axles on one power truck?

This is also for those who are well-meaning, but don't have main line railroad experience, and believe they have a solution for this problem:

1.  In the current railroad environment, there is an abundance of train handling instructions, backed up by classroom and simulator training, and enforced by the use of very sophisticated event recorders aboard modern locomotives.  These days, Locomotive Engineers typically make their first paid trip as an Engineer after only about a year or less of training, which includes only a few months of on-the-job training.  And the OJT is not necessarily with one Engineer.  There is not enough time to really bond the trainer and trainee and thoroughly teach fine points of train handling (which are not part of the Company training program).  The trainer Engineer primarily wants to get the student proficient enough to learn where to begin slowing or stopping well enough in advance, so that there won't be a runaway or a collision.  There's no time for teaching much finesse, and there is not enough OJT time for the student to experience the unplanned and unusual conditions that test the Engineer's skill and knowledge.  Maybe the student will encounter a situation like this during training, and maybe not.  Such situations don't occur frequently.  Also, the experience of the trainer Engineer is not always great.  The really good Engineers on a district are typically the Road Foreman of Engines' first choice to train student Engineers, but they get tired of it and often ask for a break, leaving the next group of student Engineers to trainers who themselves were students not that long ago.

2.  The Company training programs are designed to teach processes, not skills.  Engineers have to use the processes, because the event recorders tattle when they don't.  When all Engineers run the engine using the same processes, each Engineer's work can be measured based on an industrial management system called Six Sigma.  Usually that term only comes up in the shop environment, but that is what the railroad Locomotive Engineer processes are based on, with fuel economy and brake shoe wear being the main goals.  "Back in the day," Engineers all ran the engine by the seat of their pants, and each one ran slightly differently from the next, because training hardly existed and experience  was the actual method of learning.  Plus, there were no multi-event, radio-download, event recorders to pour data into sophisticated computer programs that detect exceptions to the official process for running locomotives.  This was in its beginning when I retired as a Road Foreman.  I would get three or four emails per week from a guy whose job was following up on exceptions (a big part of Six Sigma) and I had to review the event recorder data myself and interview the Engineer, and then email an explanation for closeout of that incident back to the desk guy who had sent me the initial notification.  Usually the desk guy had two or three whole years of Experience as an Engineer.  Wow.  Impressive.  They sure thought they had everything already figured out, and sometimes wanted to argue with me about my closeout!  Of course, I rode with Engineers all week, and usually split the running with them 50/50, so what would I know, compared to his couple of years of running and his nice air-conditioned cubicle job?

So, you may begin to see that it is an Engineer problem, yes, but only to a degree.  If Engineers have not been given an opportunity to experience unplanned and unusual conditions, they can do only what the limited training makes them believe they should do.  The chances of doing it correctly from a blind guess are not great.

Here, if you are interested to know, is my analysis of the video:

1. You can see that there is no engine air brake applied.  The brake cylinder pistons are all the way in, not out.
2. You can't see any dust from the sanders, indicating that sand was probably not being used.
3. If the train was heavy and/or had stopped on an ascending grade, the Engineer should have laid down multiple-unit sand for an engine length when coming to a stop.  That gives the wheels a little "tooth" to use when starting.
4. Sand should have been used continuously when the Engineer had to go past Run-3 or 600 amps of traction motor current to get the train to begin accelerating.  Accelerating -- not just moving.
5. If starting was difficult -- and it obviously was -- engine brakes should have been applied, to do two things.  They cause the brake shoes to wipe oil or grease off of the wheel tread.  Clean wheels have better traction.  Also, engine brakes furnish resistance if a pair of wheels tries to break loose and spin, catching and stopping the spin and regaining traction on that axle.  If it's necessary to use Run-6 or Run-7, to get moving and gain speed slowly, the Engineer may need to use a lot of engine braking as resistance to slipping.  Sanders usually cut out at 4 MPH (to prevent long-term use of sand, which sends abrasive dust into the traction motors) so it's even more important that, when the engine is pulling very, very hard at speeds below, say, 10 MPH, there is some resistance against slipping and the wheel treads are clean.  The use of the engine braking should be tapered off to zero as speed increases.  When the train has finally found a natural speed (the speed it will continuously run on an ascending grade in full power) of 15 MPH or less, the Engineer should still apply engine brakes lightly when approaching and passing wayside flange oilers which are placed on curves to reduce friction and wear.  It's important to keep the tread of the locomotive wheels clean so they can do their best on oily rail.  One does not want oily wheels trying to maintain traction on oily rail.  When running at speeds above 15 MPH, this typically isn't necessary.

These two skills can allow an Engineer to start a heavy train under adverse conditions, but they are learned skills, not taught skills as part of the Locomotive Engineer training programs of our railroads.  My purposes for riding with my Engineers was to share my knowledge through coaching and by demonstrating that I knew how to apply my knowledge and experience.  And this is just one example of unplanned events that can't be taught in a classroom, and only come from experience and getting legacy knowledge from other Engineers (or the Road Foreman) who have run enough miles to have experienced this themselves.  The methods for starting a train like this one are outside the approved processes, but the train is also outside the normal operating environment, and exceptions in these sort of situations can be explained and tolerated.  But they are exceptions and might be questioned.  A good explanation of the unusual conditions and the fact that the exceptions only were used for a short time to get the train stabilized and underway, so that it could henceforth be operated by approved processes, should suffice.

Tom, that is the best explanation of the sad state of "engineer training" in the railroad industry that I've ever read. You comment, "...The Company training programs are designed to teach processes, not skills..." perfectly describes the problem with the training provided to new and inexperienced engineers today. The industry today does not want their engineers to think or develop train handling skills, they just want them to follow the process.

You and Big Jim are both career railroaders. I genuinely appreciate your willingness to contribute to threads like this. The "street cred" you guys bring to discussions like this is very beneficial. The information you provide is very educational to the OGR Forum members who are not railroaders but want to learn about things like this.

Thanks, guys!

Tom,
We could probably talk for hours about sand and using the engine brake and I sure can't write about it all here. Also, things changed so much over my career that we couldn't do what we used to be able to do by the time I left.
I mostly (not always) didn't use the engine brake in an attempt to stop slipping because usually we were down so slow that by doing so would stall the train out. As I said, the lead or even the second axle were the main culprits in wheel slip and usually weather was involved along with it.
There were times that what little sand could be applied wouldn't be enough and the train would just stall on wet rail. If it wasn't raining or snowing very hard, we could usually cut the units loose from the train and slowly sand sand the rail over top of the mountain. I say slowly because, as you mentioned, over a certain speed the only sand available was the lead axle sand. Get even faster and the brainiacs in Motive Power decided that the sand wouldn't work at all! But, as long as it wasn't raining hard and how far away from the top you were, we could just sand the rail over the top, go back, grab the train and take off again.
If it was pouring down rain, you were defeating the purpose as the sand would be washed off the rail before you could get started again.

Remember what I said about not using the engine brake to stop the slipping or we would stall? One of the "processes" I never told any official about was that during some snowy/icy conditions when the lead axle/s just would not stop slipping, I went back to the rear of the unit, got down on the step and closed the "Application & Release" anglecock. That way I could apply some engine brake to just the lead unit, not the rest of the consist, and stop the slipping. Just after topping the hill I would go back and open it up again.

Oh! And this "process" stuff! Don't get me started on how the people behind desks made things hard on everyone!

Where's the Magne-Traction when you need it...

I thought 6S was implemented to build things like washer machines (GE) and radios (Motorola).  Something standard, day in, day out.  How can one do that with a train, which locomotive and car consists change every day.  In an environment of constant changing conditions, both of weather and the track?

Also, I thought a part of 6S was a review of processes.  Does that not mean bring in the people who actually do the work to get their outlook every so often?

Excellent responses by two pros'.. I would submit, it is not only railroading that has this this training/experience ineptness, but many fields.  Law enforcement in particular is suffering terrible.  All the experience is gone.  And many that have received the basics in of the the particular discipline, think they know it all.  I'm sure you'e all heard, " Yea I Know"... Companies just won't admit, there is no equivalent to EXPERIENCE'...

Thank you Big Jim & Tom for the replies. I now have a better understanding of what actually happens when "Wheel Slip" occurs, and how modern training is no substitute for on-the-job old style working experience.

I just took it for granted that the engineer throttled-up slowly inside the lead cab to get the consist moving from a stationary position, and then just "maintained" the speed accordingly. I never even considered the problems you have starting a train on an incline, and on wet/icy rails.....why did I think all railroad tracks were built level.....and the temperature never dropped below 10 degrees celsius???  And pulling the consist around a bend slowly.....of course there will be a weight shift in the loco's, something else I had never considered.

It now appears to me that engineers piloting these modern behemoths have to be so smart and clever to get them moving, keep them rolling, and to get them to stop when and where they want. My hat is off to you fine gentlemen (and ladies it now appears).

Thank you both for the most interesting read on real-life diesel locomotive driving I have ever come across. 

Peter on the fabulous Gold Coast in sunny (and mainly stinking hot) Queensland, Australia.

It sure is way more complicated than it first sounds when you hear someone talk about it.   I guess when you think of potentially several million pounds and 15,000-20,000 horsepower being pushed around, things can get pretty complicated!

Great topic, I love to get the real scoop, and there's nothing like 30-40 years experience to deliver it!

One other thing that I need to mention about wheels slipping. It is very easy to overpower the rail conditions. There were times when the eighth notch was just too much, slip, slip, slip. Notching down to seventh or even sixth would be enough to keep the wheels from slipping and make it over the mountain. I could get most tonnage trains over the the hill very slowly in sixth without any slipping, but, fifth would not get it done. Yet, just as note, the Fifth notch is a magical notch!

Now, Gunrunner,
Enter "Wheel creep" or in your words "Traction Control".
Wheel creep is very different from wheel slip! Wheel creep is one of those wonderful things that was brought along by technology that allows the wheels to actually have a controlled spin that is minutely faster than the actual ground speed of the train. It is controlled by computers. These are your High Adhesion units or Hi-Ads. This allows the unit to pull more than a unit without this system.
If you listen carefully to a train lugging upgrade, you may be able to hear the tell-tale "squeal" of the wheels as they are microscopically slipping up the hill.
I still live within earshot of my district and can hear trains climbing the hill out of Roanoke. One day not long ago, I was outside working in the yard when I heard a train coming and the only that I could hear was this squealing sound of the wheels until it topped the grade close-by and power was eased off.

Jim, I have do doubt there are countless little things like some of the intricacies of traction control that unique to trains and not necessarily applicable to other forms of transportation.  I suspect there is a lot of research into improving traction and the life of the RR equipment.  I personally always marveled how much traction you can get with steel on steel anyway.

That's why it's great to hear from people that have actually walked the walk here.   I'll have to take note if I'm at a point where I can hear a train on grade and see if I can pick up the sound of wheel creep, I don't get much opportunity to be in that position.  I didn't realize they actually wanted the wheels to spin, if only a little bit.

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

Jim, I have do doubt there are countless little things like some of the intricacies of traction control that unique to trains and not necessarily applicable to other forms of transportation.  I suspect there is a lot of research into improving traction and the life of the RR equipment.  I personally always marveled how much traction you can get with steel on steel anyway.

That's why it's great to hear from people that have actually walked the walk here.   I'll have to take note if I'm at a point where I can hear a train on grade and see if I can pick up the sound of wheel creep, I don't get much opportunity to be in that position.  I didn't realize they actually wanted the wheels to spin, if only a little bit.

John,

The three men in the EMD Engineering Department that developed and patented the "Super Series" wheel adhesion control system, which first came on on the production 50 series units (GP50 and SD50), actually got the idea from NHRA profession drag racing in the Top Fuel & Funny Car categories. Back in the 1960s, the professional drag racers using Nitromethane were actively developing and mastering the speed control of those huge rear tires (slicks in the trade) in order to increase friction (traction) between the race track surface and the tire. The three EMD guys (Bruce Meyer, Chuck Logston, and A. P. De Buhr)  found a way to duplicate that tactic of allowing the steel wheel to "creep", up to a maximum of 10% above track speed, on the steel rail, by using a radar transceiver pointed at the ground, behind the front pilot, to supply information the the solid-state "Super Series" control module. 

The pronounce "squeal" of the wheel as it creeps on the rail head, can be quite pronounced in the cab of the unit. As the system was improved, and eventually used in AC traction units, adhesion levels approaching 50% can be obtained thus providing drawbar pulls of as high as 200,000 lbs (on a locomotive weighing 410,000 lbs)

In the beginning, diesel electric locomotive wheel slip "control", was actually a "detection" and then "corrective action" taken type of system. Just like a steam locomotive, when the Engineer "detected" the drivers slipping, the throttle was closed until the slip stopped. On diesel electric units, when the wheels slipped, the current differential between the traction motors was "detected" by the use of through-cable transformers, which then sent a low voltage signal to the load control circuits, and power was reduced until the slip was recovered. Even up through the EMD GP/SD40-2 series units, the WS10 Module "detected" and then "corrected" wheel slips. The advent of the "Super Series" wheel adhesion control system, change the design philosophy of "detection and correction" to complete control of wheel speed in relation to train speed, thanks to a radar transceiver.  

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

I didn't realize they actually wanted the wheels to spin, if only a little bit.

Around 1976 or '77, we on the Santa Fe added ten new EMD GP40X experimental units to the roster, numbers 3800-3809.  They had 3500 horsepower, and so were suitable for high speed intermodal trains, but they also had a new wheel slip system that allowed wheel creep.  These were also our first locomotives that electronically disabled m-u sanding above 4 MPH.  I was an Engineer out of San Bernardino, then and was on the Engineers' Extra Board, frequently working in Hill Pool freight service, between San Bernardino and Barstow over Cajon Pass  The ascending grade begins right away when leaving and is about 25 miles of continuous 2.2% grade.

I remember well the first few trips I made on GP40X's.  They were on intermodal trains to Barstow, as well as in the Valley pool on the moderate undulating and curving Third District between San Bernardino and Los Angeles.  They impressed me as fast engines, great for regaining speed after leaving curves, and very fast on accelerating from a stop.  They were used in 4-unit consists when new and being tried.  Then, I caught a heavy freight train to Barstow, over Cajon Mountain.  We made good speed, around 20 MPH on the long straight pull to Keenbrook, but then we got into curves.  That's when my first experience with wheel creep began, and we lost 5 MPH.  But we kept going.  I knew that multiple unit sanding would not work, and we kept climbing and squealing at 14-15 MPH.  I didn't feel any surging, which was my main concern.  Once over the top, we went down the east side of the pass, which is 1.6 % with good dynamic brake, but not as good as the 6-motor equivalent, the SD45-2's.  Once east of the narrows out at Oro Grande, they easily rolled the train right along at the allowable 55 MPH (because we had empty cars in the train).

So, it was obvious that they were good dry-rail locomotives.  However, we had rain not long after the last trip I described.  I brought a train in (another drag) from Los Angeles with 4 of the GP40Xs,  and it changed crews on the main line at San Bernardino.  I went over to the roundhouse and tied up, then drove up the pass, to Blue Cut, just below Cajon station.  It was just drizzling a fine rain, and I could hear the engines coming out of Keenbrook -- coming, and coming, forever, it seemed.  The wheel creep system was not working so well on wet rail, and the engines were squealing, but also, were unloading and loading up.  I could hear it in the engine sound.  Speed was around 5 MPH.  Right in front of me, the train stalled at Blue cut, on a wayside flange oiler.

So turn things forward a year or two.  We received a number of GP50 locomotives, numbered beginning right after the GP40Xs.  They were the same horsepower, but had a refined version of the wheel creep system, and performed better on wet rail.

The Mechanical Department hated for Engineers to use sand, because the dust got into the traction motors and there's no denying that it was abrasive.  So, EMD granted their wish.  Some of the old Engineers who had started in the 1930s and early 1940s ran the multiple unit sanders all the way up the mountain on heavy trains, because that's what they learned to do on steam, and also had to do on FT's, with their primitive wheel slip systems.

This is one of those things that was not welcomed with a band and a parade by the Locomotive Engineers, but it became the norm, complaints faded away, and we learned a few new skills in mountain railroading because of it.  And the result was that trains still ran, and traction motor maintenance cost was reduced.

"Some...ran the multiple unit sanders all the way up the mountain on heavy trains"

The guy ahead of me on the seniority list was like that. You could stand at the top of the mountain and didn't have see the train to know where it was from the dust cloud that followed him around! 
I have seen times when using the old sander valves (the ones with the lever on the outside wall that you held with your foot or a piece of wooden clothes pin) that it would suck so much air out of the main reservoir that you had to quit sanding in order to get your pressure back up or it would start putting the brake on the train!

 There is nothing like the real thing'... Fascinating and well written descriptions of a very educational topic'... THANKS VERY MUCH GENTLEMEN' for sharing your knowledge with us'.... much appreciated'..👍😉👌

Let me ask one of our experts.   I have sat at crossings blocked by a train watching the train try and pull away, unable to do so, the engineer would set the brakes in the rear of the train then back the train up compressing the couplers draft gear. Then when starting forward the locos were starting one car at a time. Could the young lady grinding wheels and track in the video have used this technique to get her train started ?          j