trying to decide if I'll be adding snoots to my roster. as the 81" & 88" are the EMD standard nose lengths for my 1979 modeling period. so lets hear your thought 81" nose 88" nose 116" nose 123" nose so the last 2 are the choices or decisions I've been looking at or leaning towards doing but not 100% sure. what are your thoughts also will have a nose headlight with a mars light between number boards.
Hhhhmmm. Interesting question. If your RR was like many others at that time, you might have tacked your order of these units to a larger carriers order to help with units costs. And say you ordered more than one order, then both would be plausible. As you know the extended length noses the carriers used were intended to house radio control equipment, or early DP, and as such, may well have cost more per unit than the standard 81/88" noses. But maybe not with tacking on an order, but not equipping with the radio control equipment. Seeing as 1979 was nearing the end of some of these production runs, I would say about anything you want to do would be OK. I kinda like the snoot noses myself, as evident by my QA&P ex-SP SDT-2 acquisitions represent, but mine is like 15-20 years later than your time frame, I think. I am gonna think about this and reserve my vote for a bit. But just wanted to opine here to start the flame, er comments.
im kinda a Snoot man myself got some pics from an SD40T-2 SP Snoot lettered in Goldbar wa years ago maybe should have mentioned that my roads is a Large class 1 so new units not a problem. one thing with my Locotrol though is they are all master units as we did lkike the Southern Did and rebuilt older 50' cars into radio cars so as to be able to operate with any units. BN had some 81" & 88" nose locotrol units the UP opted for the 116' nose and the ATSF opted for the 123" noses so any optioned unit can be locotrol plus getting ready to paint a couple of F45's here when the weather chills out a little lol But just wanted to opine here to start the flame, er comments. Didn't know you were a Firefighter setting your own fires hehehehehehehehehe
I would say to do one of the two shorter noses. The Snoots were pretty specific to the Santa Fe, so unless it is a Santa Fe locomotive, then I would say no. You might be able to pull off a Santa Fe repaint scenario, but the 81" nose would make your model fit in with the majority of the other SD40-2s that were built.
Actually as for Snoots They were owned by UP, SP on their tunnel motors, KCS, and the ATSF. Plus CP had some that were 106" I believe So not just limited to the ATSF. As an FYI.
What was the purpose of the Snoot nose? Was it aesthetic or did it serve a functional purpose? Looking at the roads you just listed, they all seem to be Western roads. Your geographic location could determine what your locomotive looks like too.
My freelance is a Midwestern/Western road. The snoot served to house locotrol radio equipment in the nose, pre DPU but same basic principle just an earlier form of it.
If your road had helper service, then of course a Snoot would not be out of the question. I don't know much about Locotrol. Would an equipped locomotive have to run in the lead lashup as well as the DPU position? How often were they seen up front with a train? I'm just trying to think about how a realistic roster would be built. In my mind, I'm thinking, 'If I were to randomly generate an SD40-2, what are the chances it has a snoot nose?' If they are a rare locomotive, it would make sense to focus on the more mundane 'regular' SD40-2s. If they were a significant portion of the SD40 class, then modeling it would make sense too. It's interesting that KCS would have extended nose locomotives; they don't really operate in mountainous territory where a DPU would be required.
Locotrol was either a master or a remote on the BN. BN used different number series to identify master and remote. The southern used a remote/slave boxcar rebuild as the mid train control unit. The southern by doing this could use any unit it owned for mid train unmanned power. And usually the power would go all the way thru mostly seen on coal, coke, open hopper trains, or on heavy long freights. No need for manned helpers on some trains saving the RR the cost of a crew A form of locotrol dates back to the NP and GN used on their ore and coal trains in the late 1960's. As for Snoots locotrol takes up space hence the longer nose, it also depends as BN used locotrol in both 81" & 88" nosed unit's very cramped in the noses. Note of interest the BN had issues with their locotrol in the many tunnels between Montana and the west coast as an FYI. So yes locotrol will be used on my system which brings us back to the question to snoot or not to snoot. Appreciate the input and questions
Same on the MILW. As was the MILW, using GP40 units in a similar time frame. Same experiences for the MILW. Now I wonder if UP was also experimenting with locotrol, and had similar situations?
very good question i never looked at it that way until you just put a different light on it i totally forgot about the MILWAUKEE ROAD playing with the locotrol also. it seems it started to vanish during 1979 and later
When the paper mill was still in operation in my home town, 30 miles north of Green Bay, WI., the Wisconsin Central and Canadians came in off the main line with just very short nosed engines. The bigger ones kept going south or north. After the mill shut down the co-op supplies and others came in on trucks.
Thanks everyone looks like my roster will have a mix of 116" and 123" snoots. Thanks again all now to get ready to model one as I now have 3 in the que
Aaaaaaaaaaaargh Shouldn't of watched an early Norfolk Southern video now have a major hankering for high hoods lol. I don't know something about a long good coming at just seams right. I have no idea why weird I guess welp back to the video hehehehe
