Baldwin 0-6-6-0 1000 built for Soviet Union

844 views
8 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    April, 2018
  • 971 posts
Baldwin 0-6-6-0 1000 built for Soviet Union
Posted by Jones1945 on Wednesday, November 14, 2018 7:09 AM

Background history in brief: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baldwin_0-6-6-0_1000

When I was trying to browse every single page of The Railroad Museum of Pennsylvania's online photo archive yesterday, I saw this shabby diesel engines in Baldwin's folder. At first, I thought it was some experimental engines of Baldwin, but after using the google pic search function, I understand that these engines were built for the Soviet in 1945. Again, better post their pic here than storing them in my HD. Smile, Wink & Grin

In USSR:

http://www.flickriver.com/photos/27862259@N02/7992895798/

https://science-naturalphenomena.blogspot.com/2013/03/baldwin-0-6-6-0-1000.html

 


 

Bonus "track":

Jones Family Railroad Hobby YouTube Channel: 
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCu9gt9Q9RF-Hwq7xWciVcWg/

  • Member since
    May, 2012
  • 3,656 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Wednesday, November 14, 2018 1:07 PM

Since it's 1945, that would make it a DR-6-6-1500.  Using the North American designation it's a C-C road locomotive, predating the DRS-6-6-1500 road switcher by a couple of years.  Probably a 608SC engine, Westinghouse electricals.  No obvious MU connections, even on the rear, just air and signal lines.  The centipede in the last photo is the DR-12-8-750/8 demonstrator with four 750 HP engines (space for eight, only four ever installed).  Frame later reused for SAL 4500, a DR-12-8-1500/2 .

  • Member since
    January, 2002
  • 3,676 posts
Posted by M636C on Wednesday, November 14, 2018 4:42 PM

rcdrye

Since it's 1945, that would make it a DR-6-6-1500.  Using the North American designation it's a C-C road locomotive, predating the DRS-6-6-1500 road switcher by a couple of years.  Probably a 608SC engine, Westinghouse electricals.  No obvious MU connections, even on the rear, just air and signal lines.  The centipede in the last photo is the DR-12-8-750/8 demonstrator with four 750 HP engines (space for eight, only four ever installed).  Frame later reused for SAL 4500, a DR-12-8-1500/2 .

 

 

I'm pretty sure the"1000" stands for the horsepower.

That would mean a 606SC, wouldn't it?

It looks like they were numbered from 51 upward, class Db following the dramatically more successful Alco RSD-1 units (class Da) delivered at the same time.

The Russians loved the RSD-1 and were still building improved versions well after the end of the Soviet Union in the 1990s. Stalin used an RSD-1 to go to Berlin for the Potsdam conference, a real vote of confidence in those days. Heads would have rolled literally if his train had failed to get to Berlin.

Peter

  • Member since
    September, 2003
  • 7,029 posts
Posted by Overmod on Wednesday, November 14, 2018 8:21 PM

M636C
I'm pretty sure the"1000" stands for the horsepower. That would mean a 606SC, wouldn't it?

I think for this order of 30, in 1945 (numbered 20-71 to 20-100, ex-Army 2460 to 2489), you're looking at a VO, the normally aspirated inline eight-cylinder.  Postwar equivalent would be 608NA, which was later deprecated as Peter indicates in favor of the 606SC at the same horsepower (as in the famous BP-20s) but all that was later.

Apparently Baldwin was testing the 608SC (which was supposed to be good for 1500hp) and advertised somewhere in Half A Century of Diesel Engine Development that they had a 1500hp version of this locomotive -- that may be where rc gets that 1500hp.

Pity they didn't  do an end-run around the WPB and build 412s for the export units... but that's a whole 'nother strategy story.

  • Member since
    April, 2018
  • 971 posts
Posted by Jones1945 on Thursday, November 15, 2018 7:02 AM

M636C

The Russians loved the RSD-1 and were still building improved versions well after the end of the Soviet Union in the 1990s. Stalin used an RSD-1 to go to Berlin for the Potsdam conference, a real vote of confidence in those days. Heads would have rolled literally if his train had failed to get to Berlin.

Peter

Thank you for the info, Peter.

"Stalin's special for his travel to the Potsdam conference, Alco diesel DA20-27 on broad gauge at Potsdam in 1945." Wiki


 

 

Тепловоз Дб in USSR.

Jones Family Railroad Hobby YouTube Channel: 
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCu9gt9Q9RF-Hwq7xWciVcWg/

  • Member since
    April, 2018
  • 971 posts
Posted by Jones1945 on Thursday, November 15, 2018 7:25 AM

rcdrye

 The centipede in the last photo is the DR-12-8-750/8 demonstrator with four 750 HP engines (space for eight, only four ever installed).  Frame later reused for SAL 4500, a DR-12-8-1500/2 .

Thanks, rcdrye. Baldwin was really ambitious on this 91 feet long 6000hp single diesel unit project. If the design worked well and mechanically reliable, it could have been a very attractive and competitive option for RRs.


 

PRR's DR-12-8-1500/2

Jones Family Railroad Hobby YouTube Channel: 
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCu9gt9Q9RF-Hwq7xWciVcWg/

  • Member since
    September, 2013
  • 4,104 posts
Posted by Miningman on Thursday, November 15, 2018 8:05 AM

Well then they should have built it that way with 6000 hp instead of half that and then a quarter that and then derated yet from there. 

Even worse, Baldwin did not think of the consequences of their construction methods which should have been foreseen but wasn't on their radar at all. 

Regardless, the Pennsy was duped and Baldwins reputation started it's severe decline. They weren't done yet, got a few more chances, but struck out, quite badly. 

Does anyone know just how often you have replace all those brake shoes, basic cost of doing so and down time? Yeesh.

  • Member since
    September, 2003
  • 7,029 posts
Posted by Overmod on Thursday, November 15, 2018 9:57 AM

Miningman
Well then they should have built it that way with 6000 hp instead of half that and then a quarter that and then derated yet from there.

What? now YOU are a member of the 'what we can't make on margin, we'll make up on volume' school?

If sales of the Essl locomotive were unprofitable due to high overhead cost (which the sources I've read all indicate was the case) and the general idea of dedicated 750hp per axle was not exactly the finest flower of contemporary slip management, why would you think that eight 408s would prove the case less expensively than four did?

And keep in mind this was prewar, when EMD's first cost and maintenance expenses were even more than they were for the 1947 motive-power survey.  That should tell you exactly what the problem was.  (Remember this locomotive, and the Centipede that followed, were covered in the motive-power survey in a couple of paragraphs).

The thing is STILL one of the few legitimate 120mph diesel locomotives from that era, certainly the only one with reasonable consist length for true 6000hp.  People tend to forget it was a high-speed design; they just see how ponderous it looked, how many extra axles it seemed to have, etc.

Even worse, Baldwin did not think of the consequences of their construction methods which should have been foreseen but wasn't on their radar at all.

Why should that company, or their Westinghouse overlords, have that much concern for 'consequences' when their whole experience building steam went the 'other way'?  Look at what Farrington, for example, reported wrong with one of the new 3460s on receipt.  You or I with 20/20 hindsight understand why you don't build locomotives with bypass hoses between parts of the structure, or tens of small V-belts driving the water pump, or electrical wiring down in sealed troughs in the floor.  Steam experience certainly didn't teach them any such things.

Regardless, the Pennsy was duped and Baldwins reputation started it's severe decline. They weren't done yet, got a few more chances, but struck out, quite badly.

When they abandoned the 400 series for 625rpm engines on the one hand and free-piston turbines on the other, the game was pretty much over; tinkering with Maybach high-speed engines and hydro transmissions didn't help at all; it's difficult for me to see any future, including if they'd won the large order from PRR that went to Geeps instead, with Westinghouse exiting the railroad business.

Does anyone know just how often you have replace all those brakeshoes, basic cost of doing so and down time? Yeesh.

Especially on the cold rainy/snowy night that the usual stories have that work being done.

Lots and lots of downtime when the unit is used in service where the brakes are grinding, grinding, grinding all day and night long.  That's not the service the locomotive was designed for.  You take a Facel Vega Excellence and use it for UPS delivery towing a trailer every day and see how you make out...

  • Member since
    May, 2012
  • 3,656 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Thursday, November 15, 2018 10:32 AM

The oops was mine on the 1500 HP - just couldn't quite imagine a C-C road engine at 1000HP.  It probably did have a VO.  The 1000HP 608NA was hardly used domestically - a couple of babyface variants and the DT6-6-2000 demo that ended up on EJ&E (well, there were 56 DS4-4-1000 switchers equipped with 608NA).  The 606SC was more successful than the 608SC - fewer cylinders and generally lower speed operation reduced the tendency to "soup" the turbocharger.  Baldwin did eventually work that out with "Mexican Hat" pistons named for their shape but first tried on NdeM's Centipedes.

SUBSCRIBER & MEMBER LOGIN

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

FREE NEWSLETTER SIGNUP

Get the Classic Trains twice-monthly newsletter