Diesel Quiz pt. Dix (10)

[PBenham]

Back to Mudville's #1 railroad, New York Central for these toughies.

NYC bought its F3s for both passenger and freight service. Were the passenger F3s equipped with dynamic braking, like their freight counterparts.

NYC bought GP7s with and without dynamic braking. true? false?

NYC had large fleets of Alco Road units. Did any of the FAs/FBs have steam generators.

Alco, General Electric and MacIntosh & Seymour sent a pair of prototype road units to NYC. One worked well, the other didn't. One was a passenger locomotive, the other a freight unit. Which one was a success, and which was a flop, relatively speaking.

Alco sold an example of each RS series units to NYC, but which model was the first one that NYC did not buy?

NYC however, did inspire or request, a new RS series model. Which one was it and who else bought that model? But, did NYC order its Century series successor?

Finally, Alco was able to make one last sale to its best customer for which model. Many of these are still active on shortlines and/or regionals. 

[rrboomer]

NYC did buy dynamic brake equipped GP-7s.

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

NYC ordered two straight diesels for use on the Putnam branch at about the same time it ordered the tri-powers (prehistoric hybrids?).  The freight diesel was successful and lasted to about 1953, when it was cut down to a slug.  The passenger diesel was a total failure.

The new RS model was the RS32 (DL721). Only NYC (25) and SP (10) bought them.  NYC did not order any C420's.

NYC's last Alco purchase was for 10 C430's, which lasted intact into the Conrail era.

[Trainmaster.Curt]

The last ALCO question i may know. I think it was the M420's, and may'be the C424, M636

[JonathanS]

The first RS that was not purchased by the NYC was the 2400 HP V16 RS-27, that is ignoring RSC and RSD models.

[Mimbrogno]

I don't think that NYC's passenger F-3s had DBs, but I thought that their FP-3s had both DBs and a steam generator. The FP-3s were a mess, they were underpowered for the trains they were used on and also a little too heavy for the speeds they ran.

 I got a couple of additions to the list:

NYC liked using RS roadswitchers for it's commutor trains, the trick is that the RS units weren't all from Alco. Who built the other one(s)? Also, the RS designation given to the units of the other builder(s) isn't actually the true designation for them. What is the full designation for them?

NYC purchased 4 different models of Baldwin carbody locomotives. Name them, and how many of each they purchased.

Matthew Imbrogno
-Mechanical Vollenteer, Arizona Railway Museum
www.azrymuseum.org

[PBenham]

OK, the answers are all in! Now, to Matt's puzzlers. Baldwin had built the "other" RSs: the RS12s, which were bought by NYC because the preferred Lima 1200HP road switchers were not available. Now, for the true designation of the Alco RS units: RS1= E-1641A. RS2=E-1661,A,B,C. RS3=E-1662, A,B. The variations were based upon changes to the model generator employed, or the presence of amplidine (which only an electrician could love), conventional or static (Post-1954) control excitation.

Now, Matt, NYC bought DR4-4-1500s (cabs and boosters),DR6-4-1500s (again both cab and booster units), both of which were "baby faces", and RF16s (cabs and boosters)NYC's sharks. That makes three or if one counts cab and booster units as seperate models, six. They didn't get any DR6-4-2000s, "baby faces" or sharks (or DR6-4-1000/2s, a some times quoted model number for baby face passenger cabs)or DR12-8-1500/2s, like good ol' PRR, and they didn't buy any "RF15s",either. They were bought by EJ&E and PRR. So, I'm either right or ya got me!

[Mimbrogno]

PBenham, you're pretty good, but I got you on one of them! The forth BLW carbody locomotive is the RP-210 of 1956. If you can't place the designation, maybe this will help: X-Plorer. The train was an inovative and well designed set, but because it used hydrolics and metric parts it could not be maintained easily. 

 Here's an interesting foot note about those RS-12s. First off, the full designation for them is DRS 4-4-1200/1 SC. NYC preffered the Lima LT1200s because the Baldwin counterpart was rated at only 1000hp at the time. When BLW and Lima merged in 1950, the Baldwin roadswitcher was uprated to 1200hp, and it also incorperated several improvements brought in with Lima. NYC actually ordered a set of LT1200s just before the merger. They were specified to have a number of options, including 3 pane windows, built in markerlights, universally compatable MU connections with notched electric throttles, and cab signals with automatic train stop devices. Lima had not started on the main assembly of the locomotives, but they had purchased and prepaired the accessory equipment NYC had ordered. When the merger was finalized, and the production was moved to Eddystone, Lima simply moved the parts they had ready to BLW's plant, and fitted them on new RS-12s. These RS-12s were the only Baldwins equiped with three pain windows, and Lima style markerlights (Baldwin already had a style of markerlight boxes that not only incorperated the marker lenses but the locomotive number boards as well.)

 There is an interesting story about NYC's DR 6-4-1500s. They were rebuilt twice, once soon after delivery, and again in the late 50's. The first time they were rebuilt, they recived new trucks and running gear. The original purchase order did not state that NYC would be using the locomotives at speeds of up to 90 mph, and that the standard A-1-A trucks Baldwin used would not be suitible. When first built, the units were basically a cab version of the DRS 6-4-1500s like those supplied to Norfolk Southern and Columbus & Greenville RRs, with the short Commonwealth cantalever trucks and airtanks astride the fuel tank in the center. The trucks had a maximum safe speed of only 65mph, and it is obvious that they would not be suitible for NYC's intended service. Thus, NYC replaced the trucks with larger tri-mount drop equalized trucks, which inturn required that a smaller fueltank and airtank arrangement be used. The second rebuilding occured when NYC standardized their diesel equipment, and replaced the Baldwin powerplants with EMDs.

NYC had one other large (non-switcher) Baldwin diesel, what was it?

 Matthew Imbrogno
-Mechanical Vollenteer, Arizona Railway Museum
www.azrymuseum.org

[PBenham]

PBenham, you're pretty good, but I got you on one of them! The forth BLW carbody locomotive is the RP-210 of 1956. If you can't place the designation, maybe this will help: X-Plorer. The train was an inovative and well designed set, but because it used hydrolics and metric parts it could not be maintained easily. 

 Here's an interesting foot note about those RS-12s. First off, the full designation for them is DRS 4-4-1200/1 SC. NYC preffered the Lima LT1200s because the Baldwin counterpart was rated at only 1000hp at the time. When BLW and Lima merged in 1950, the Baldwin roadswitcher was uprated to 1200hp, and it also incorperated several improvements brought in with Lima. NYC actually ordered a set of LT1200s just before the merger. They were specified to have a number of options, including 3 pane windows, built in markerlights, universally compatable MU connections with notched electric throttles, and cab signals with automatic train stop devices. Lima had not started on the main assembly of the locomotives, but they had purchased and prepaired the accessory equipment NYC had ordered. When the merger was finalized, and the production was moved to Eddystone, Lima simply moved the parts they had ready to BLW's plant, and fitted them on new RS-12s. These RS-12s were the only Baldwins equiped with three pain windows, and Lima style markerlights (Baldwin already had a style of markerlight boxes that not only incorperated the marker lenses but the locomotive number boards as well.)

 There is an interesting story about NYC's DR 6-4-1500s. They were rebuilt twice, once soon after delivery, and again in the late 50's. The first time they were rebuilt, they recived new trucks and running gear. The original purchase order did not state that NYC would be using the locomotives at speeds of up to 90 mph, and that the standard A-1-A trucks Baldwin used would not be suitible. When first built, the units were basically a cab version of the DRS 6-4-1500s like those supplied to Norfolk Southern and Columbus & Greenville RRs, with the short Commonwealth cantalever trucks and airtanks astride the fuel tank in the center. The trucks had a maximum safe speed of only 65mph, and it is obvious that they would not be suitible for NYC's intended service. Thus, NYC replaced the trucks with larger tri-mount drop equalized trucks, which inturn required that a smaller fueltank and airtank arrangement be used. The second rebuilding occured when NYC standardized their diesel equipment, and replaced the Baldwin powerplants with EMDs.

NYC had one other large (non-switcher) Baldwin diesel, what was it?

 Matthew Imbrogno
-Mechanical Vollenteer, Arizona Railway Museum
www.azrymuseum.org

I, like Central's management who'd have wanted to, forgot the RP-210 a/k/a the XPlorer. My (cheez)Kindergarden class went to see it waaaaaaay back when NYC was proud of it. Guess who was the only kid to be impressed?  I never had a better day in school than that one. Well, there was when ! NYC had DRS4-4-1500s 7300-7301. They had EMD 12/567Cs in them after 1956, spending their days switching at La Salle st. Station, Chicago. They had given NYC a 100% larger fleet of DRS 4-4-1500s than PRR, and a 50% larger "fleet" than Lehigh Valley had. (#200)