Been reported that ex DRGW SD7 #5305 has been scrapped. :sad: The remaining scrap is being used towards the purchase of a new locomotive by the CCRG - Canyon City and Royal Gorge. They chopped up the unit sometime late last week.
Ya know, I remember seeing that a few years back, looked great. However people told me it had deteriorated recently, what exactly happened to it that they needed to get money for a replacement.
Sad to see a distinct piece of 'Grande history gone... The Grand Junction hump will never be the same without it.
Hmmm.... A low nose SD7 on the Grande. When did it get its nose chopped? What was the history of the loco? Kevo
SD9, actually. #5305 (as-delivered number in 1957) was involved in a grade crossing wreck in April 1972. D&RGW towed it to Burnham Shops in Denver, where an EMD-sourced low hood cab kit was fitted. The nose was painted with the stacked Rio Grande herald but the rest of the locomotive had the original switcher scheme paint with the 'flying' Rio Grande lettering. This made it completely unique in the roster. Locos lettered with 'flying' Rio Grande scheme had simple chevron stripes on the nose. Later stacked Rio Grande lettering included a smaller stacked heralds on the nose below the nose stripes. After the rebuild it was assigned to Grand Junction in the hump yard. I worked in that assignment until Dec 1992 when it was retired. It was stored at Burnham until '95, then sold to OmniTrax in Loveland, CO, rebuilt and leased to Northwestern Pacific until 1998 when floods shut the RR down. 5305 went back to OmniTrax until 2003. In 2003 it was sold to Canon City & Royal Gorge and served until 2012. Source: The Prospector (Rio Grande modeling/hist. society), 2d Qtr 2007.
Jus FYI: D&RGW's SD7s were numbered 5300-5304, and the SD9s were numbered 5305-5314. http://www.drgw.org/data/
Worked with an engineer yesterday who remembered that unit, due to it's low nose, from his former stints on the old hump in Grand Junction. He too was very sad about it's scrapping.
D&RGW kept it going for many years past when most class I's retired SD9 fleets. Burnham shops had a ton of expertise to keep them running like swiss watches. When the D&RGW retired them, they did so for a reason. The units sat for years in between assignments, likely deteriorating further. CCRG spruced it up and ran it for almost another decade until it was just worn out. I know it was painted nicely, but the unit was worn out. Ghengis, I agree it should not have been scrapped (rather sent to CO RR Museum), but the CCRG likely could not extract any more utility from it without further significant expenditure (and minimal return on the investment).
the unfortunate thing is that for it to have been moved via rail, it would have had to been equipped with alignment control couplers, a $20,000 job to perform on this engine. I was talking to a guy who had advance notice that it was going to be scrapped, They had thought of selling it, but the cost of transport alone would have been outrageous to ship via truck.
Why not put it on a flatcar? There are other options, and no height-limited tunnels (maybe overpasses) that I know of between CCRG and Golden, CO. I get the safety issue with the older couplers, but not why the unit was not stored until a method for movement was devised. It was a much too distinctive, unique piece of CO rail history to see go to the scrapper. UP could donate the transportation in the name of rail history preservation, the biggest expense would then be loading and unloading the unit at origin and destination. I'm not in the rail industry, but this unit wouldn't have to move far. Just seems like a collassal waste to scrap it uncerimoniously. Am I off base here?
Bummer. Locos like this make me sad,if i ever decide to get hired on,it will just either some ace or gevo. Ill never have a chance to enjoy a classic loco.
