Mr. Deggesty's comments on the B&O PA thread led me to do some searching to find some information these apparently rare Southern PA units. These are for you, Mr. Deggesty:
Well you have pictures of half SOU RR's roster. ( 6900 - 6905 sub lettered NO&NE ) When SOU bought the PAs ( with ATS) it assigned them to Bristol - Memphis. ( Tennessean #45 & 46 ). It normally took 4 locos and they were rotated off at Chattanooga for forwarding to <> the Alco servicing facility at Pegram shop in Atlanta.
They replaced F units on that run when the PAs became operational. The F unints replaced Alco DL-109s that were on the run. For a while during a coal strike the -109s ran thru on the N&W to Lynchburgh but unknown if they continued to WASH.
When N&W made Bristol -Radford all diesel N&W leased all SOU equipment to run thru on N&W Bristol - Lynchburgh. At that time SOU removed the PAs from service and ran almost all E units on the N&W run thrus.
The Alcos were then sent to Peagram and as far as is known they remained parked there never to turn a revenue mile again. Retirement and scrapping date is unknown. Once scrapped 6 E uits were assigned 6900 - 6905 and sublettered NO&NE like their following numbers. One of those numbers also had added an extra steam loco whistle. Sometime before and after Amtrak day SOU only kept 16 Es 6900 - 6915 almost exclusive for the Southern Crescent. It used 4 on each train until SOU joined Amtrak. Since the SOU Crescent only operated 3 days a week 12 locos were enough and were almost always changed both directions in ATL to go to Peagram for servicing.
Other passenger service including extra Crescent sections were operated with various F units however extra Crescent sections might be a mixture of Es & Fs robbed Es from first sections of Crescent.
.
That paint scheme looks like it was designed for the PA's.
Trains, trains, wonderful trains. The more you get, the more you toot!
Possibly, but I think it originated with the EMD E and F units Southern purchased, and then in turn was applied to the PA's.
No matter, it was a classy paint scheme any way you look at it!
As a matter of fact, most of those original diesel paint schemes were very well thought out. I was amazed how well they worked on the modern diesels Norfolk-Southern repainted as "Heritage" units. Truly a work of design genius.
As a touch of irony, the paint jobs on the Southern and Erie heritage units (both SD70ACe's) were patterned after the paint diagrams on PA's.
Remember the Alco DL109's preceeded the PA's.
Save
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
The paint scheme on the DL109/DL110's was probably derived from the paint scheme on the E6A/B's, which came from EMD's Styling Department.
The PA's wore it best!
CSSHEGEWISCHThe paint scheme on the DL109/DL110's was probably derived from the paint scheme on the E6A/B's, which came from EMD's Styling Department.
Funny, I thought it came from Otto Kuhler (and part of the design was the color reversal on the B units, which I never particularly cared for).
RME,
The paint schemes of most of the major American Railroads in the early diesel era were all very impressive designs. I think the cab units of General Motors, the "E" and the "F" as well as the American Locomotive Company - aka ALCO "PA" passenger unit and "FA" freight unit all lent themselves to impressive styling efforts.
Was any ever more famous than the Santa Fe Railroad passenger "War Bonnet" in red, yellow and silver Native American head dress? It will live well beyond the 20th Century!
The Alco PA and FA were very high horsepower units compared to the General Motors F and E. I believe they were diesel 2-stroke engines. The sound they made was more of a low speed "chugging" that can be believed.
I heard the famous Santa Fe PA's pulling passenger up the Raton Pass in New Mexico in 1967. Driving in a car next to the train running on the westbound main line we came upon the engines and the "loud chugging" of the diesels - it quite surprised me - was just unbelievable compared to the usual smooth sound of the GM "E" and "F" diesels.
------------------------------
I also heard a pair of New York Central Alco FA units pulling freight near Toledo, Ohio. I was riding in the baggage car of a Grand Trunk Railroad steam trip pulled by Canadian National 4-8-4 CN 6218 "northern" back in 1968. I believe the trip ran to Toledo, Ohio and back. At any rate the steamer overtook the New York Central freight going north back to Detroit. It was the same sound those 2-stroke diesels all made. In this case the FA was not all that an impressive engine when I heard it - it looked "for all the world" like it wouldn't pull the "hat off your head."
In my then youthful opinion the passenger Alco PA locomotive was entirely the more impressive of the two diesel designs.
-------------------
Of the Santa Fe lashup of Alco PA's I saw in 1967 there remain two that are presently painted for the Nickle Plate Railroad and I believe are repowered with un - authentic modern power. Several other Alco PA diesels were purchased and used in Mexico and have now returned to the US to also be repowered without their original 2-stroke engines.
I am not aware of any Alco FA engines remaining and at this reading I do not believe any original Alco 2-stroke powerplants remain. A formidable locomotive sound unfortunately lost never to be heard run again.
-------------
Piston power internal combustion engines are divided into 2-stroke and 4 - stroke designs. The 2-stroke power plant fires fuel every turn of the crankshaft and the 4-stroke fires fuel at ever two turns of the crankshaft. Theoretically the 2-stroke would be twice as powerful as the 4-stroke although this works out about 1.5 times as powerful. Many other performance paramaters divide the two designs. I believe the early Alco 2-stroke powerplants never worked out as well as was hoped but they were definately different locomotives.
Doc
Dr DThe Alco PA and FA were very high horsepower units compared to the General Motors F and E.
How so? PA 1s were 2000 hp; PA 2s 2250. FAs = 1500, later 1600 hp.
E3s through E7s = 2000 hp; E8s = 2250; E9s = 2400. F3s and F7s = 1500; F 9s 1750 hp.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
I guess if you look up the dates for the various units and when they were produced if would be obvious that the two companies were in a horsepower war with Alco leading the way in high horsepower development. GM was 4 stroke and Alco was 2-stroke the designs had obvious drawbacks. GM had big daddy warbucks money and was in diesel development from the 1920's. Alco produced steam locomotives and converted to diesel development late in the game giving GM a huge advantage in the sales, marketing concepts.
It was also unclear at the time that the time honored practice of steam locomotives remaining on railroad property for maybe 40 or 50 years was going to change to an automotive - used car trade in game. GM took back and repowered many units and the whole railroad motive power game was in flux. How could Alco and Baldwin who were steeped in steam locomotive technology compete with a marketing monolith like war wealthy diesel developer General Motors!
Dr DI guess if you look up the dates for the various units and when they were produced if would be obvious that the two companies were in a horsepower war with Alco leading the way in high horsepower development. GM was 4 stroke and Alco was 2-stroke the designs had obvious drawbacks. GM had big daddy warbucks money and was in diesel development from the 1920's. Alco produced steam locomotives and converted to diesel development late in the game giving GM a huge advantage in the sales, marketing concepts. It was also unclear at the time that the time honored practice of steam locomotives remaining on railroad property for maybe 40 or 50 years was going to change to an automotive - used car trade in game. GM took back and repowered many units and the whole railroad motive power game was in flux. How could Alco and Baldwin who were steeped in steam locomotive technology compete with a marketing monolith like war wealthy diesel developer General Motors!
Believe you have your strokes reversed - GM/EMD was 2-Stroke and ALCO was 4-Stroke.
BaltACD Dr D I guess if you look up the dates for the various units and when they were produced if would be obvious that the two companies were in a horsepower war with Alco leading the way in high horsepower development. GM was 4 stroke and Alco was 2-stroke the designs had obvious drawbacks. GM had big daddy warbucks money and was in diesel development from the 1920's. Alco produced steam locomotives and converted to diesel development late in the game giving GM a huge advantage in the sales, marketing concepts. It was also unclear at the time that the time honored practice of steam locomotives remaining on railroad property for maybe 40 or 50 years was going to change to an automotive - used car trade in game. GM took back and repowered many units and the whole railroad motive power game was in flux. How could Alco and Baldwin who were steeped in steam locomotive technology compete with a marketing monolith like war wealthy diesel developer General Motors! Believe you have your strokes reversed - GM/EMD was 2-Stroke and ALCO was 4-Stroke.
Dr D I guess if you look up the dates for the various units and when they were produced if would be obvious that the two companies were in a horsepower war with Alco leading the way in high horsepower development. GM was 4 stroke and Alco was 2-stroke the designs had obvious drawbacks. GM had big daddy warbucks money and was in diesel development from the 1920's. Alco produced steam locomotives and converted to diesel development late in the game giving GM a huge advantage in the sales, marketing concepts. It was also unclear at the time that the time honored practice of steam locomotives remaining on railroad property for maybe 40 or 50 years was going to change to an automotive - used car trade in game. GM took back and repowered many units and the whole railroad motive power game was in flux. How could Alco and Baldwin who were steeped in steam locomotive technology compete with a marketing monolith like war wealthy diesel developer General Motors!
Wasn't until 1930 the GM got into the locomotive, and of course EMD's success was also related to the War Production Board required Alco, Baldwin and Lima to produce steam during the wat while EMD was allowed to produce and develop diesel locomotives.
BaltACD et al.,
I stand corrected the Alco was the 4-stroke engine and the GM was the 2-stroke. Alco PA was delivered with 2,250 horsepower in 1946 when the GM E unit had 2000 horsepower. General Motors upgraded the E unit to 2,250 horsepower in 1954 well after the Alco was out of production. Both engine designs were externally aspirated with turbo or supercharging. Alco rushed their diesel engine into production without extensive development - the unseen design problems killed the PA locomotive future.
A typical A-B-A lashup of PA power such as I saw on the Santa Fe in 1967 would have added the horsepower unit total to 7,500 horsepower which was over the top of what the large steam locomotives could develop on the Santa Fe which were generally in the 6000 horsepower catagory. Pennsy did develop about 8000 horsepower with the "duplex drive" Q2 design. Its not hard to see how merely adding diesel units could develop all the power a railroad could need. Costs of multiple units also added up so the percieved efficiencies were not always apparent.
---------------------
General Motors was unbelievably aggressive in its post war dieselization advocacy program. They ran numerous advertisements characterizing steam locomotives as ancient technology.
The story that Electromotive officials met with the GM board and laid out a plan to revolutionize the rail transportation industry and suplant existing locomotive manufacture in America is entirely true.
The "E" and "F" cab unit products from GM were remarkably well developed and many railroads that were committed to steam railroading just could not overlook the cost reductions and performance the GM Electro Motive products offered. Oil was selling at a mere $5 per barrel.
Pennsylvania Railroad got several diesel locomotive demonstrators from GM and just continued to run them and to turn them around at the end of every run. The low cost mileage they ran up was phenomenal. Steam looked archaic in comparison. The GM product was tha well developed - trouble free and well thought out - and it LOOKED GOOD. How could the railroads resist?
Burlington - CB&Q had the beautiful early stainless steel cab units. Great Northern had the orange and dark green. Northern Pacific had the dark green and light green set off with their black and red emblem - polished like new Cadillacs! Baltimore and Ohio had the tremendous blue and dark blue stripe with grey and white trim - so dignified that Washington DC was lame without them. Illinois Central had the wonderful orange stripe on dark brown - so good looking it earned the famous song "Good morning America how are ya? - the City of New Orleans!" Iowa Pacific is copying it again today!
Texas Pacific had the red engines with white striping - Canadian Pacific had the beautful maroon and silver. Wabash had the blue and white - Milwaukee had the charcoal grey with red band an yellow striping - Western Pacific had the silver with orange band. Southern the gorgeous green and white - Rio Grande had the yellow with black striping still seen today on the Royal Gorge tourist train.
Those GM diesel trains easily topped steam railroading with beauty and grace and with performance. Union Pacific is still running the highly polished Armor Yellow with grey and red striping passenger GM "E" cab units in competition with its steam program today - they are still just that good!
------------------
Those great looking railroad paint schemes just WOWed em! - everyone! New York Central had the light and dark grey lightening stripes with its red Central emblem - for cryin out loud it looked as good and as fast as a NYC 4-6-4 Streamlined Hudson or mighty 4-8-4 Niagara! - looked that good just standing still!
I can still see those ATSF red "war bonnet" painted diesels streaking across the south western New Mexico desert at close to 100 mph - quiet - effortless - when I saw them that way in the 1960's - they just looked "wild west!" to me - like nothing else did.
And, Yes I knew why steam had passed away!
---------------------------
And where is the mighty General Motors today - one of the greatest American corporations in history - they are tryin not to catch "the down and out goin out of business blues." I know I have lived in Flint and Detroit most of my life! and watched them crumble before my eyes.
And I can remember when all America waited breathlessly for the GM stylists to give us the next years new Buick, Chevy or Pontiac - and wondered why Cadillac always was the most supurlative car looked so good - Ford wondered too - and the world waited!
------------------------
Now General Electric in Albany, NY makes all the railroad diesels - and mighty GM has plowed under its famous Electro Motive Division diesel locomotive factory in La Grange, Illinois - a testament to how the mighty have fallen!
---------------
Dr DI stand corrected the Alco was the 4-stroke engine and the GM was the 2-stroke. Alco PA was delivered with 2,250 horsepower in 1946 when the GM E unit had 2000 horsepower. General Motors upgraded the E unit to 2,250 horsepower in 1954 well after the Alco was out of production.
No. You are still in error. The PA 1 was built 1946-50, with 2000 hp; the PA 2 1950-53 with 2250 hp.
EMD built E3s starting in 1938 with 2000 hp and continued with E 4s through E 7s until 1949 (one more in 1953), all with 2000 hp. E 8s were built 1949-1954, with 2250 hp.
Schlimm,
Ok - the ALCO "PA" and EMD "E" had roughly the same power and both increased this amount in 1950 - but let me explain one more time the high horsepower PA experience I saw and read about in TRAINS MAGAZINE.
The year was 1967 - I was traveling west with my parents in a 1966 Chrysler pulling a 26 foot Airstream trailer. We were traveling from Chicago to California following the Santa Fe main line.
Day after day I would see the Super Chief and El Captain pass by going both east and west pulled by General Motors EMD "F" units in A-B-B-A format set up for passenger use with steam generators and geared for 100 mph.
Santa Fe used only the EMD "F" units at that time - they had a huge fleet of them - and did not use the post WWII EMD "E" passenger units. The "F" produced 1,500 horsepower per cab unit.
--------------------------
Near Raton Pass I encountered the similar Santa Fe A-B-B-A lashup of Alco PA 2,250 horsepower units pulling mail trains with passenger coaches on mountain grades in the last year that Santa Fe used this type of ALCO PA power.
-------------------------
About this time the ATSF main line shut down - it was tied up by a freight train that burned off an axle on one of the cars derailing only one car of the consist.
So there we were about 10AM driving on the highway and we came upon both the Super Chief and El Capitain both east and westbound trainsets stopped and waiting for a clear track - right out in the "middle of no where" in the desert.
Well my dad pulled the Chrysler New Yorker and aluminum Airstream trailer up to one of those rural grade crossings - right next to the pride of the Santa Fe passenger fleet - the Super Chief fully loaded with passengers - just sitting there! Everyone was very concerned!
Dad and I got out of the car and went over and talked to the train crew to see what the problem was, when the engineer invited me to come up into the cab of the EMD passenger "F" unit - and take a look around - blow the air horn and sit in the engineer seat - open the engine room door and take a look at the diesels.
Well that made my day - and somewhere along the way I mentioned to him having seen the six axle Alco PA's pulling the grade at Raton making all that racket and asked him about them.
And he said - "Those are the ALCO really high horsepower 2,250 hp diesels - these EMD "F" units have only 1,500 hp."
I said - "They were really impressive to watch and I really liked the styling."
He said - "They are the most powerful diesels on the Santa Fe at this time, but we are getting ready to phaze then out of service because of their many maintaince problems. Which is a shame because they could really pull."
----------------
Later that year when TRAINS MAGAZINE came out I found out that Santa Fe was one of the last railroads with an operational fleet of Alco passenger PA's diesel engines and I was glad that I had a look at them - I never saw them again! Somewhere I a couple of 35 mm color slides of that train.
This was my ALCO PA experience - and also that of TRAINS MAGAZINE in 1967 who did a story on the fading Santa Fe ALCOS - announcing their final run. You might look it up because the author expressed about the same opinion of them that I have.
As did the Santa Fe Railroad crews that I talked to who knew them as REALLY HIGH HORSEPOWER PASSENGER POWER!
Those Santa Fe EMD "F" units in an A-B-B-A lashup like I saw had about 6,000 horsepower. Where as the ALCO "PA" A-B-B-A lashup had about 9,000 horsepower.
Later when I graduated from highschool in 1968, dad took me on a cross country rail journey and on the return trip we rode the Santa Fe Super Chief from Los Angeles to Chicago.
Gone were the EMD "F" unit power - replaced with another new generation of six axle GM EMD FP 45 box cab passenger units of around 3600 horsepower each - and not nearly as beautiful as the Alco "PA" and EMD "F's".
Again within a few more years - in 1971 AMTRAK took over the nations passenger railroading and the great Santa Fe Super Chief passenger fleet was gone also.
And those were great days - days of change for American Railroading.
Vs an F unit yes they are "high horsepower" but to the contemporary E unit they're the same. Biggest difference is the size of traction motors used on the PA v the E which gave them superior tractive effort and the ability to use more of that power at lower speeds.
You've confused one for the other, not surprising viewing things thru rose colored glasses.....
ML
Dr D Now General Electric in Albany, NY makes all the railroad diesels - and mighty GM has plowed under its famous Electro Motive Division diesel locomotive factory in La Grange, Illinois - a testament to how the mighty have fallen! --------------- Doc
The last time that I drove past the plant on 55th Street, it was still in existence. Admittedly, it doesn't assemble locomotives anymore (Caterpillar does not like to pay union wages and Muncie is in a "right-to-work" state), but the engine plant is still active.
schlimm Dr D I stand corrected the Alco was the 4-stroke engine and the GM was the 2-stroke. Alco PA was delivered with 2,250 horsepower in 1946 when the GM E unit had 2000 horsepower. General Motors upgraded the E unit to 2,250 horsepower in 1954 well after the Alco was out of production. No. You are still in error. The PA 1 was built 1946-50, with 2000 hp; the PA 2 1950-53 with 2250 hp. EMD built E3s starting in 1938 with 2000 hp and continued with E 4s through E 7s until 1949 (one more in 1953), all with 2000 hp. E 8s were built 1949-1954, with 2250 hp.
Dr D I stand corrected the Alco was the 4-stroke engine and the GM was the 2-stroke. Alco PA was delivered with 2,250 horsepower in 1946 when the GM E unit had 2000 horsepower. General Motors upgraded the E unit to 2,250 horsepower in 1954 well after the Alco was out of production.
Keep in mind that Alco was doing this with ONE engine while the E's required two. From what I've heard, EMD was getting a bit nervous as a one engine locomotive was less expensive to build, but breathed a sigh of relief when the 244 engine proved to be a maintenance headache.
IIRC, the PA's ran on 40 inch wheels, so they were equpped with 752 traction motors. The E's had 36 inch wheels and had smaller traction motors, upshot was that a PA could outpull an E.
Perhaps the main reason hat EMD did so well with selling diesel locomotives was the development work done of the 567 courtesy the USN using that engine in many ships. Had Alco had a V-16 used by the USN versus the 539, they might have had a better opportunity to do development work on it. Think how EMD would have fared if they were still using the 201A.
The cuyohaga valley line operates a former cn fa
vbeachLast I saw, there are FA units operating on the Grand Canyon Railway and the Wine Train in Napa. I think some other tourist trains may also be running them.
Don't know about the Wine Train, but the last I've read about the Grand Canyon Railway was they love those ALCO's, the head of motive power calling them "bulletproof."
erikem Keep in mind that Alco was doing this with ONE engine while the E's required two. From what I've heard, EMD was getting a bit nervous as a one engine locomotive was less expensive to build, but breathed a sigh of relief when the 244 engine proved to be a maintenance headache. IIRC, the PA's ran on 40 inch wheels, so they were equpped with 752 traction motors. The E's had 36 inch wheels and had smaller traction motors, upshot was that a PA could outpull an E. Perhaps the main reason hat EMD did so well with selling diesel locomotives was the development work done of the 567 courtesy the USN using that engine in many ships. Had Alco had a V-16 used by the USN versus the 539, they might have had a better opportunity to do development work on it. Think how EMD would have fared if they were still using the 201A.
Navy involvement was a two edged sword. Navy requirements didn't neccessarily help an engine for railroad use. I'd recommend Eugene Kettering's ASME paper of 1951 to anyone interested. It is available as a PDF on the web (somewhere).
It was really the 201A that was intended as a submarine engine and it had some problems imposed by the Navy (ability to withstand shock from depth charges, for example) that didn't help in a locomotive. I think there was only one submarine that had 201A engines, and later developments by Winton using the ideas from the 567 were fitted in the wartime fleet submarines. But the Fairbanks Morse was by far the best submarine engine and that didn't help them in the locomotive market.
The first turbocharged diesel in a submarine ever was an Alco 540, a 539 with a largely welded structure (for shock). But there may have only been one of those.
But the Navy money presumably helped EMD and Winton, and to a lesser extent Alco develop the engine designs.
The 567s in Navy vessels were largely in relatively small surface vessels, landing ships and patrol craft. There were Destroyer Escorts designed for eight engines of 16-567 size with diesel electric drive but these only ever received four engines each, and I think these were the Winton versions that matched Navy's requirements better. I think the Wintons had conventional pushrod operation of the valves, rather than the overhead camshafts of the 567. It possible that the pistons and connecting rods were interchangeable with the 567.
I think the Navy took the 567s because not enough of their preferred Wintons were available, and used them in vessels of lower priority. Of course after 1945, many of these engines ended up in doodlebugs, along with other wartime engines.
EMD had the resources to spend more making their engines work, funded by General Motors, while Alco, a big company with many wartime contracts didn't put the effort into getting the bugs out. EMD were able to test the 567 in the late 1930s and by 1942 had many of the problems solved.
Alco tested the 241 during the war, but the modified 244 hadn't been tested enough by 1946. It became much more reliable later but the early problems lost them a lot of their market.
M636C
M636CI'd recommend Eugene Kettering's ASME paper of 1951 to anyone interested. It is available as a PDF on the web (somewhere).
You'll find it here, along with many other ... many other interesting things. Scroll down to find it.
That is true, most of the original END plant was sold to a developer. The engine plant is still in existence, as is the locomotive testing trackge on the east side of the existing building next to the IHB railroad. The test track is being used for testing the SD70ACe-T4 locomotive and also testing the SD70ac for LPG fuel tenders and locomotives. Not every day, but occasionally.
loco6625 et.al,
David P. Morgan - editor of Trains Magazine, March 1971, p20.
ALCO in a warbonnet
"DUST OFF the bound volumes of the railroad trade press for the year 1946, and you will find them thick with coated stock and frequently with full-color ad plates of steam's pallbearers. Come-from-behind GM, now the heavyweight, was there with its E's and F's, of course...Perhaps most exciting of all in retrospect, there was an impassioned, no-holes-barred pitch for a machine billed simply as the "2000." She was Alco-GE's A1A-A1A of her code designation's horsepower, available in cab or booser carbody, advertised to operate a million miles before major overhaul, extolled for possessing one engine and five linear feet less that the passenger unit of the major competition. She was the PA. Santa Fe recieved the first PA's (No. 51, a 6000 horsepower A-B-A locomotive, was proclaimed Alco's 75,000th locomotive) and assembled a 44-unit fleet of the diesels from 1946 to 1948. All wore the system's famous red-yellow-silver warbonnet dress, all rode the high country of Cajon and Tehachapi and the senic Surf Line to San Diego, all got a chance at some of the glittery names in their owner's pages of the Guide, and ... well, in many hearts Alco PA and Santa Fe became, and always will be, synonymous. Never mind that No. 51 and her sisters were bumped off the Super almost before the publicity prints were out of the dryer. Never mind that Santa Fe headquartered most of its PA's at Barstow, Calif., and the square-noses seldom were more than a division or two away from those master mechanics who comprehended their turbocharged 244-model V-16's. Never mind that to this day President John S. Reed recalls a spot on the Raton Pass which was nicknamed "Alco Curve" because that's where it was touch and go whether a heavily laden set of PA's, handicapped by idler axles could make it around and over the summit. Just remember their lightening acceleration, black smoke and all ... and the incontrovertible evidence that one engine, not two, 16 cylinders instead of 24, were winding up 2000 horses ... and, above all, what these illustrations portray so much better than words - that Santa Fe's PA's, more than anybody else's PA's, were marvelous mechanisms on the move.
Santa Fe's Schenectady royalty did much for us during those early post-World War II years when...there was still an unwritten but no less inviolate order and sense of decency about passenger-train makeup and operation that dictated streamlined front an back ends on any consist worth a name. First, the PA's provided an esthetically acceptable alternative to the streamlined carbody patented by Electro-Motive in the design of Baltimore & Ohio 51. Other builders tried, with unfortunate or mixed or novel results, including Alco. But the PA made good. She was big, bold, arresting; and that grilled headlight casing was just the touch she deeded to lift handsomness to something memorable. Next, Santa Fe's PA's seasoned train-riding and - watching out in California (and down in Texas) at a time when many reasoned that the end of the system's 4-8-4's was the end, period. For even a steam buff scarcely could resist these great barns of dieseldom cranking the Fast Mail west out of San Berdoo, cruising past the surf bathers on the shore of the Pacific, making time through the sage and sand of Indian country. Finally, the PA has this going for it in history: Without the PA, Santa Fe was a Baldwin/GM road - the former in steam from compounds to 2900-class Northerns, the latter in diesels from the 1 and 1A of 1935 to today's F45's...Alco succeeded, in 1946-1948, with 44 PA's.
'Honorary steam locomotive,' said George Hilton. It figures that the locomotive which debuted with a party on a private siding beneath the Waldorf Astoria would exit the roster of its first owner with fan trips." - D.P.M.
Like I said - hearing 3 of those turbo charged PA 16 cylinder 2,000 hp engines in A-B-A lashup pulling the grade at Raton Pass NM was a circa 1967 memory I will never forget! NO DIESELS EVER SOUNDED LIKE THESE!
Dr D ... 3 of those turbocharged PA 16 cylinder 2,250 hp engines in A-B-A lashup ...
When did ATSF have PA-2s?
BTW: in case anyone didn't know, here is something worth following if you do Facebook, or knowing about if you don't. (Even with a MLW 12-251, it'll be worthwhile; start agitating NOW to get the B-unit off the old Algoma Central...)
Here are a few for Dr. D...
Raton Pass...
Lots of head end varnish - the Fast Mail perhaps?
Honorary steam locomotive...
Notching out for California...
Dr. D: Later when I graduated from highschool in 1968, dad took me on a cross country rail journey and on the return trip we rode the Santa Fe Super Chief from Los Angeles to Chicago. Gone were the EMD "F" unit power - replaced with another new generation of six axle GM EMD FP 45 box cab passenger units of around 3600 horsepower each - and not nearly as beautiful as the Alco "PA" and EMD "F's".
On a Christmas trip in Dec. 1967 to California on the combined Super Chief/El Capitan, 22 cars. I think we had 5 F-units on the point leaving Chicago. On the return trip in Albuquerque, NM they pulled 7 F-units off and put 2 brand new FP45's on for the trip to Chicago, masive engines compared to the F's. Dr. D' - what part of Flint and when. Moved there in Aug. 1959 - moved away in early 1998. Bob
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.