BNSF changes on Mullan

[geepster775]

Was wondering if anyone has modified the Mullan route to reflect some of the changes that BNSF has made to the property since taking back control. Most notably, they relocated the signals that used to be near the road crossing at Austin and moved them further up the hill a bit, just to the west of where old West Austin switch used to be, near the midpoint of the present day siding. They also are trying to run 135 car coal trains upgrade using the same 3x4x1 power arrangement. The 4300 series MRL ACEs without the isolated cabs are now trailing-only, cannot be occupied by a crew per BNSF rules (same with BNSF ACEs 9330-9399) so the 4400 series MRL and older BNSF orange SD70MACs, ratty paint and all, have taken over the helper duties. I have not yet attempted to run 135 hoppers uphill to see of OR physics will snap couplers or not.

[geepster775]

Well, I have an answer now. I did add the 10 cars behind the helper.

[CSRX]

You got me curious, so I went and tried it. So far so good. It's not a rocket ship by any means and have to fiddle around between notch 5 6 and 7 to avoid major wheel slippage. So far at Mile 15.5 with no breaks, using ORTS 1.5.1.

I set up this consist to be roughly the same as the beginning of the video you posted. 3x4x1 with 77/58. If I did my math right, that roughly gives 1.7 HPT. I used locomotives from the TS Mullan and Seligman, Coal hoppers from TS Mullan, and two SD70MAC's from this file here in the library, for you, or anyone else willing to give it a test as well.
https://www.trainsim.com/forums/file...leid?fid=89812

Edit:
Also used one of the locomotives as well.
https://www.trainsim.com/forums/file...leid?fid=89553

Successfully reached Blossburg. Little over an hour and a half climb. 7-9mph max.

[derekmorton]

I will give it a run.

[derekmorton]

Ok, I had to change 2 engines that I did not have, I got up the hill with no warnings.
The highest the coupler behind the 3rd engine got to was 320klbs.
Well done for the makeup.

I have to add that I am running ORNYMG 161.1 to do this run.
Shows that the current physics ( advanced adhesion ) is getting very close.

[wwhall]

Are the mid-train helpers even manned now? As to the MRL ACEs, most of them seem to have scattered to the rest of the BNSF system. I've seen them running on the BNSF in Kansas on multiple occasions.

[geepster775]

My consist was 3 eng, 67 cars, 4 helpers, 68 cars (10 added to orig 58) , 1 dpu. Running latest testing version. No C4s in my power pool, was able to run 12mph without any slip or sand. Then got the coupler.

[PerryPlatypus]

I believe among the timetable documents included in the route manual is the equation for helper placement. Head end consist plus half of helper consist = 5 units. Total number of units is 8. 5/8 *135 = 84.375. Thus for a 3x4x1 with 135 cars, the ideal consist is 84 cars ahead of the helpers, 51 behind. That assumes all of the locomotives are equal. If you throw some C4s or DC traction units in the mix, your results may vary and they may intentionally shift the cut-in location slightly to accommodate that. The rules typically allow you to vary the helper placement location by up to +/- 5 cars or so. So no wonder Shawn had an easier go of it.

By the way, some much more substantial changes in recent years than a pair of signals being moved is the brand new CTC siding named Bradley a few miles west of Avon, the removal of the siding at Avon, extension of Phosphate (west of Garrison) and conversion of Phosphate to a CTC siding, re-spacing of intermediate signals in the Elliston-Avon-Bradley area etc. etc. Most or all of those changes had occurred in the final 2-3 years of MRL ownership.

[geepster775]

Second attempt consist, 3 eng, 77 loads, 4 helpers, 58 cars, 1 dpu. The 10 additional cars moved to ahead of helper... 12 mph-ish, got some slip and corrected, then broke again. Version 1.5.1.1959 still.

For consist, I cloned "BNSF Dash 9-44CW 125car C-BTMSPB 4hlp dp" and added the extra cars.

D9, Ace, Ace --- Ace, Ace, Ace, Ace --- D9

[geepster775]

Third attempt was successful. 85 loads, helper, 50 loads was how it was split. At 135 cars, train barely fits at Blossburg. Dry rail. Need to add some moisture and C4's next.

[derekmorton]

Added the version of OR to my previous post.

I think it is important to post the version of OR when testing consists of this level.

[LuFeDuTi]

Was wondering if anyone has modified the Mullan route to reflect some of the changes that BNSF has made to the property since taking back control. Most notably, they relocated the signals that used to be near the road crossing at Austin and moved them further up the hill a bit, just to the west of where old West Austin switch used to be, near the midpoint of the present day siding. They also are trying to run 135 car coal trains upgrade using the same 3x4x1 power arrangement. The 4300 series MRL ACEs without the isolated cabs are now trailing-only, cannot be occupied by a crew per BNSF rules (same with BNSF ACEs 9330-9399) so the 4400 series MRL and older BNSF orange SD70MACs, ratty paint and all, have taken over the helper duties. I have not yet attempted to run 135 hoppers uphill to see of OR physics will snap couplers or not.

I had heard something about BNSF taking over Montana Rail Link. That Video is impressive. Two Trains with Coal one going up with another going down, other Train with Containers going up, and Four EMD SD70ACE going down.

[CSRX]

Tried in wet weather with the same consist I had prior. Stalled out by mile 11 from massive wheel slip, tried everything I could to keep it rolling from my own personal experience of running long and heavy trains up these types of grades. No go. No broken coupler either surprisingly, though I managed to set the automatic brakes before too much slack ran out.
Using the latest testing version of ORTS this time around.

In the past with MRL, if this occurred, typically another help set would run up to tag onto the rear and help, with only additional locomotives in run that are needed. Meaning maybe 1 or 2 of the 4 unit helper set is running, and the others are isolated, To help reduce coupler stress.

[PerryPlatypus]

135-140 car coal trains have been the "norm" for coal trains going east out of the Powder River Basin for many years, but this is a new normal for coal trains going west via MRL, and they sure seem to cause issues on Mullan. Those issues are being compounded by the fact BNSF is severely neglecting to clean the helper locomotives, and they have thrown a lot of ratty SD70MACs on their last leg into helper service. My dad was visiting Mullan about a month ago and on one particular day they added two 4-unit helper sets to a 3x1 coal load right out of Helena, obviously as a preventive measure (as Shawn alludes to, most likely 2 or 3 the helper units were isolated to not exceed the allowable powered axle limits for Mullan). Later that same day, a westbound coal with just one 4-unit helper set was having mechanical trouble with one or more of their locomotives and was only doing about 8-9 MPH near Austin, which prompted them to call the DS to get another helper set to come out of town to help. According to that crew on the radio "Last time we were going this slow at this spot we stalled in the tunnel". Just a few days later, another photographer observed a similar situation unfold with another coal train, yet again prompting a rescue helper set to be sent up the hill. Mind you these all occurred on clear sunny days. I can't imagine how they will sustain this in rainy weather or going into the winter.

[CSRX]

135-140 car coal trains have been the "norm" for coal trains going east out of the Powder River Basin for many years, but this is a new normal for coal trains going west via MRL, and they sure seem to cause issues on Mullan. Those issues are being compounded by the fact BNSF is severely neglecting to clean the helper locomotives, and they have thrown a lot of ratty SD70MACs on their last leg into helper service. My dad was visiting Mullan about a month ago and on one particular day they added two 4-unit helper sets to a 3x1 coal load right out of Helena, obviously as a preventive measure (as Shawn alludes to, most likely 2 or 3 the helper units were isolated to not exceed the allowable powered axle limits for Mullan). Later that same day, a westbound coal with just one 4-unit helper set was having mechanical trouble with one or more of their locomotives and was only doing about 8-9 MPH near Austin, which prompted them to call the DS to get another helper set to come out of town to help. According to that crew on the radio "Last time we were going this slow at this spot we stalled in the tunnel". Just a few days later, another photographer observed a similar situation unfold with another coal train, yet again prompting a rescue helper set to be sent up the hill. Mind you these all occurred on clear sunny days. I can't imagine how they will sustain this in rainy weather or going into the winter.

I imagine it's going to go about as well as it does where I work. Stall outs, rail burns, and traction motors burning up, because they can't seem to understand you are supposed to reduce tonnage ratings during the winter months. I'm honestly very surprised they put SD70MAC's in the helper pool service, and not sets of their own isolated cab SD70ACe's. Shrugs.