Trains.com

Tennessee Valley Railroad Museum receives FM H-16-66

3202 views
10 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    December 2017
  • From: I've been everywhere, man
  • 4,259 posts
Tennessee Valley Railroad Museum receives FM H-16-66
Posted by SD70Dude on Monday, August 16, 2021 7:30 PM

From the TVRM facebook page:

"The Tennessee Valley Railroad Museum announced the donation of a significant railroad locomotive from the Tennessee Valley Authority to the Railroad Museum’s collection, a Fairbanks-Morse model H16-66 #F3060. Built in 1958 and known as the “Baby” Trainmaster, the locomotive was a 1600 horsepower version of the 2400 H24-66 Trainmaster, at that time the most powerful single unit locomotive being built. The locomotive is one of the few surviving locomotives from this short lived locomotive supplier.

“TVRM is honored that TVA would place this locomotive in our collection for future display and possible operation” said Museum President Tim Andrews. “TVRM’s mission is to educate the public on the role of railroads in developing the Tennessee Valley region and what better example than this locomotive to showcase the intertwined efforts of the railroads and the supply of electricity by TVA in powering our economy.”

“Placing this retired locomotive with the Tennessee Valley Railroad Museum means that this rare piece of history will be preserved for years to come,” said Carol Eimers, TVA regional vice president, east region. “TVA worked closely with TVRM on a plan to safely transport this locomotive from the Gallatin Plant to Chattanooga, and we are proud it will be a part of the 60th anniversary celebration.”

Delivered to TVA’s Gallatin generating plant near Gallatin, TN the locomotive spent its entire working career moving coal four miles from the CSX interchange to the plant. This locomotive was retired in 1997 when coal shipments shifted from train to barge delivery. The locomotive is one of only nine Fairbanks-Morse locomotives preserved today.

Fairbanks-Morse entered the diesel locomotive market at the end of World War II planning to capitalize on the unique opposed piston engine used on many submarines and other naval vessels during the war. Featuring two pistons in each cylinder the engine produced more horsepower per cylinder than other diesel engines of the time. This unique design also led to its downfall as the engine did not hold up in the harsh railroad operating environment and required dedicated maintenance facilities to make repairs. TVA 3060 was one of the last locomotives they delivered to any railroad, as they exited the locomotive market by 1963 having produced less than 1500 units.

The Gallatin plant provided the perfect location for the locomotive to operate for almost forty years. The simple operation allowed for the locomotive to be well maintained by the dedicated repair forces and the short, flat route did not present a severe challenge to the locomotive. With Fairbanks-Morse still supporting their engines it isn’t hard to imagine the locomotive operating to the present day.

The locomotive has remained at Gallatin until TVA approached TVRM in 2019 regarding possible donation and preservation of the locomotive. Because rail service is no longer available to the plant extensive planning for moving the locomotive over the highway to Chattanooga has been developed. TVA will assist the move by providing cranes to lift the partially disassembled locomotive to the specially equipped truck for movement to Chattanooga.

It is planned for the locomotive to be on display in Chattanooga in time for the start of the year-long 60th Anniversary celebration beginning October 14, 2021. Sponsorship opportunities to help defray the extensive costs of moving the locomotive or the 60th Anniversary celebration are available on the TVRM website or at 60years@tvrail.com."

Here is the unit in operation:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=lPLH5JwqGxg

Greetings from Alberta

-an Articulate Malcontent

  • Member since
    January 2019
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 9,571 posts
Posted by Flintlock76 on Monday, August 16, 2021 9:28 PM

That's wonderful!  "Baby Trainmaster" indeed! Looking at the video you can certainly see the family resemblance.

Thanks 'Dude!

  • Member since
    July 2004
  • 2,741 posts
Posted by Paul Milenkovic on Tuesday, August 17, 2021 6:19 PM

SD70Dude

Fairbanks-Morse entered the diesel locomotive market at the end of World War II planning to capitalize on the unique opposed piston engine used on many submarines and other naval vessels during the war. Featuring two pistons in each cylinder the engine produced more horsepower per cylinder than other diesel engines of the time. This unique design also led to its downfall as the engine did not hold up in the harsh railroad operating environment and required dedicated maintenance facilities to make repairs. TVA 3060 was one of the last locomotives they delivered to any railroad, as they exited the locomotive market by 1963 having produced less than 1500 units.

 

I will grant that the opposed piston engine does not lend itself to replacing worn cylinder liners or pistons (components of a "power assembly") without taking the entire engine apart, and this concern of opposed-piston engines is discussed on the Deltic thread.

On the other hand, is there any evidence that FM diesel engines and FM locomotives "did not hold up to harsh railroad operating environment."  If the evidence to back up such statements is lacking, this does not serve railroad preservation and railroad history to make them?

If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?

  • Member since
    January 2019
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 9,571 posts
Posted by Flintlock76 on Tuesday, August 17, 2021 6:32 PM

From what I've read the "rockin' and rollin, bumpin' and thumpin'" of the railroad environment lead to oil leaks in the FM mainline locomotives which were a pain to reapair, those in switching service didn't get quite so beat up.  

Suffice to say, the 'roads that tried the FM's for mainline service didn't want any more than the ones they bought and tried. 

In the end, the OP engines were just fine for stationary service or service in subs where they didn't get beat up.  They just weren't appropriate for railroads. 

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 24,934 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Tuesday, August 17, 2021 6:42 PM

Paul Milenkovic
 
SD70Dude

Fairbanks-Morse entered the diesel locomotive market at the end of World War II planning to capitalize on the unique opposed piston engine used on many submarines and other naval vessels during the war. Featuring two pistons in each cylinder the engine produced more horsepower per cylinder than other diesel engines of the time. This unique design also led to its downfall as the engine did not hold up in the harsh railroad operating environment and required dedicated maintenance facilities to make repairs. TVA 3060 was one of the last locomotives they delivered to any railroad, as they exited the locomotive market by 1963 having produced less than 1500 units. 

I will grant that the opposed piston engine does not lend itself to replacing worn cylinder liners or pistons (components of a "power assembly") without taking the entire engine apart, and this concern of opposed-piston engines is discussed on the Deltic thread.

On the other hand, is there any evidence that FM diesel engines and FM locomotives "did not hold up to harsh railroad operating environment."  If the evidence to back up such statements is lacking, this does not serve railroad preservation and railroad history to make them?

When I first was moved to B&O's Baltimore Terminal in the early 1970's the yard power for the terminal was mostly FM end cab switchers with several of the 1600 HP 'road switchers' (NOT Trainmasters).  My experience was that the all blew oil out the stack.  In navel service the engines would be operated at a particular throttle setting for hours on end.  In railroad service, especially yard service, the engines would only be operating  at a particular throttle setting for seconds or at most a couple of minutes at a time.  The process of flat switching a cut of cars would have the engine throttle up to get the cut moving then be throttled back to idle as the independent brake was used to slow the cut thus having the car(s) at the end of the cut roll free from the cut and into their designated track.  This action would be repeated 100 or more times for each 8 hour tour of duty the engine was utilized - and they were utilized 24 hours a day.  Riverside Shop in Baltimore did the maintenance on the FM fleet.

About 1975 or 76 they were replaced by various EMD units including GP9 road power.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    December 2017
  • From: I've been everywhere, man
  • 4,259 posts
Posted by SD70Dude on Tuesday, August 17, 2021 9:10 PM

My understanding is that FM opposed piston engines suffer from the same oil control issues as EMD 2-strokes, but are double the trouble due to having two pistons per cylinder.  

As with blower EMDs, if the engine is always worked hard and kept at operating temperature everything seals well and you have minimal carbon/sludge buildup in the exhaust manifolds.  But as with any diesel engine (4-strokes can also suffer from this), if you let it idle for long periods it won't stay hot enough, won't completely burn the heavier fractions of the fuel, and the piston rings won't seal well.  The end result is a buildup of gunk in the exhaust manifolds, which bakes into hard carbon deposits over time and is then blown out when the engine is worked hard, sometimes as burning chunks that glow red and start fires beside the track.  

One of our volunteers used to be a mechanic in a heavy truck shop.  Since it gets cold out here in the winter it is not uncommon for semis and heavy equipment to be left running if they are parked outside during layovers or periods of downtime, especially if the driver is sleeping inside.  He said it was common for stuff to roll into the shop with complaints of excessive smoke and loss of power, and once they diagnosed "wet stacking" as the problem the standard solution was to put it on the dyno and rev the crap out of it for a few hours.  

Greetings from Alberta

-an Articulate Malcontent

  • Member since
    July 2001
  • From: Shelbyville, Kentucky
  • 1,967 posts
Posted by SSW9389 on Wednesday, August 18, 2021 11:29 AM

A Baby Train Master is an H16-44. A Junior Train Master is an H16-66. See the JDI sidebar in his Train Master article in the August 1973 Trains. Specifically page 37. 

Ed in Kentucky

 

COTTON BELT: Runs like a Blue Streak!
  • Member since
    July 2001
  • From: Shelbyville, Kentucky
  • 1,967 posts
Posted by SSW9389 on Wednesday, August 18, 2021 11:36 AM

SD70Dude

From the TVRM facebook page:

"The Tennessee Valley Railroad Museum announced the donation of a significant railroad locomotive from the Tennessee Valley Authority to the Railroad Museum’s collection, a Fairbanks-Morse model H16-66 #F3060. Built in 1958 and known as the “Baby” Trainmaster, the locomotive was a 1600 horsepower version of the 2400 H24-66 Trainmaster, at that time the most powerful single unit locomotive being built. The locomotive is one of the few surviving locomotives from this short lived locomotive supplier.

It's really a Junior Train Master. The Train Master had competition in 1958 as the first SD24 had been built by EMD in July and the RSD-15 had been built by Alco since mid 1956. Of course if it is on Facebook it must be true! 

Ed in Kentucky  

COTTON BELT: Runs like a Blue Streak!
  • Member since
    July 2004
  • 2,741 posts
Posted by Paul Milenkovic on Wednesday, August 18, 2021 11:48 AM

SSW9389

 

 
SD70Dude

From the TVRM facebook page:

"The Tennessee Valley Railroad Museum announced the donation of a significant railroad locomotive from the Tennessee Valley Authority to the Railroad Museum’s collection, a Fairbanks-Morse model H16-66 #F3060. Built in 1958 and known as the “Baby” Trainmaster, the locomotive was a 1600 horsepower version of the 2400 H24-66 Trainmaster, at that time the most powerful single unit locomotive being built. The locomotive is one of the few surviving locomotives from this short lived locomotive supplier.

 

 

It's really a Junior Train Master. The Train Master had competition in 1958 as the first SD24 had been built by EMD in July and the RSD-15 had been built by Alco since mid 1956. Of course if it is on Facebook it must be true! 

Ed in Kentucky  

 

Railway Preservation News • View topic - CP FM H16-44 STILL in a deadline! (rypn.org)

The claim is that the terms "Baby Train Master" and "Junior Train Master" were used interchangably, originating in the rail fan community.

See the discussion of "gantlet" vs "gauntlet" track on another thread on the Forum.

If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?

  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Mpls/St.Paul
  • 13,776 posts
Posted by wjstix on Thursday, August 19, 2021 10:43 AM

The H-16-66 came out a year or so before the H-24-66 (which FM named "Train Master"). After the H-24-66 started production, the H-16-66 was altered so they used as much as possible the same parts, including cab and body etc.

I believe on the Milwaukee Road, H-16-66s were "Junior Train Masters" and H-16-44s were "Baby Train Masters", but if that's correct that was just an unofficial thing for that railroad.

It has happened that railroad employees have a nickname for a engine type, and railfans have a different name.

Stix
  • Member since
    July 2004
  • 2,741 posts
Posted by Paul Milenkovic on Thursday, August 19, 2021 1:16 PM

wjstix

The H-16-66 came out a year or so before the H-24-66 (which FM named "Train Master"). After the H-24-66 started production, the H-16-66 was altered so they used as much as possible the same parts, including cab and body etc.

I believe on the Milwaukee Road, H-16-66s were "Junior Train Masters" and H-16-44s were "Baby Train Masters", but if that's correct that was just an unofficial thing for that railroad.

It has happened that railroad employees have a nickname for a engine type, and railfans have a different name.

 

H16-44 "Baby Trainmaster" Rebuild paint question - Page 2 - NHRHTA New Haven RR Forum (tapatalk.com)

Or there's that pool of railfans that view the H-16-66 as a "Junior" Trainmaster with the H-16-44 as a "Baby" Trainmaster.  Fairbanks-Morse only named the H-24-66 the "Train Master" (two words, not one).  Any other names given to the engines were done by the railfan camp; none of them were official.

I suppose the nickname given to it by railroad maintenance employees cannot be disclosed here because Trains.com is a family-friendly site?

If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy