Hi, I would like everyone's opinion of this. If things had been kept equal during the World War II years and Alco had been able to continue diesel research and developement, do you think they would have been a major player today? What is your opinion? Mine is I think they would be.
This topic, especially in regard to the rushed development of the 244 engine, has been discussed and re-hashed almost since the various problems with the 244 cropped up in the late 1940's. Steinbrenner's history of Alco raises several other issues that held Alco back and eventually contributed to its demise.
To bring your question into a 2011 world, Alco would have been bought by GE just like the part of EMD has been bought by Caterpillar. A division of GE would be able to service/repair Alco locos. Both need a player with a worldwide reach to cover all markets. Anything built in the past would be on the way to extinction unless it can be modified to fit new smog requirements.
I doubt that GE would have picked up Alco for its locomotive business since Alco didn't bring anything to the table that GE didn't already have. Antitrust issues would have also been a consideration.
CSSHEGEWISCH This topic, especially in regard to the rushed development of the 244 engine, has been discussed and re-hashed almost since the various problems with the 244 cropped up in the late 1940's. Steinbrenner's history of Alco raises several other issues that held Alco back and eventually contributed to its demise.
I would also agree that a good share of Alco's problems were self-inflicted.
As for Alco being in the locomotive business today, it's easy to dismiss it out of hand, but it seems that Fairbanks-Morse Engine (apparently some descendent of the fractious company which built those appealing Train Master locomotives in the 1950s) has the rights to, and is offering for sale now, an updated version of the Alco 251 engine! I don't know if it would be suitable for the latest emission requirements (Tier IV?), but it is fun to contemplate. Also, F-M is still involved with its long-famous OP configurations, and has corporate ties with the German engine company MAN.
The 251 engine itself enjoys a favorable reputation, and has found a niche in marine and stationary applications. 251 engines power NASA's crawler-transporter, used to move Saturn V launch vehicles and the shuttle from the Vehicle Assembly Building to the launch pad.
The 251 engine is still used - But I rather doubt that you can make it Tier II compliant, let alone Tier IV. IIRC, the 244 beat out the 241 design and the 244 became the production power plant. I have heard that the 251 was sort of based on the 241 design, but have never seen the actual documentation. Alco kept 'fixing' the design issues with the 244(250) until they gave up and built the 251.
By the time the RS11 appeared with the new 251 power plant(1956), most dieselization was pretty much complete in the the US. By 1957-58, there was a downturn in the US economy and even EMD production number plummeted. Alco's 'window' to catch EMD was 1945-46 and they just did not have the goods to compete.
As far as FM - the OP design was great for a constant speed marine application, but rail use was not it's forte. And the issues with maintenance was a killer.
Jim
Modeling BNSF and Milwaukee Road in SW Wisconsin
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.