Locomotives that were proposed, but never built.

5509 views
40 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    January 2009
  • From: Poulsbo, WA
  • 425 posts
Posted by creepycrank on Tuesday, November 3, 2020 1:01 PM

Overmod

 

 
creepycrank
The rocking pin insert bearing my have been introduced at the same time as 16:1 compression ratio.

 

That was my understanding, on the 645FB.

 

If I understand the concept correctly, the piston pin doesn't actually 'rock', it is ground with multiple centers so it sweeps oil across the little-end bearing shell  each time the rod articulates.  I think it's the antithesis of a floating wristpin in that it's physically bolted to its connecting rod ... in fact on at least some 710s those are 5/16" bolts.

 Thats correct. There is no oil hole drilled through the connecting rod, the oil is squirt up to the piston by the "pee" pipe for cooling of the piston as well as for lubrication. The pin looks like it is divided into 3 parts with the parts off set slightly from each other a gap opens up as the rod "rocks" back and forth so oil can get in. I think this design was used on a British truck engine back in the 50's. It has a greater load carrying capacity than the original sleeve design. The Navy EDG engines got buy on a non-silver plated bearing because of the possible corrosion problem. Some bearings in the turbo are silver plated but it doesn't. Newport News Shipyard put "locomotive" type oil in the engines for the Nimitz class carriers because it is also a Mil spec. oil

Revision 1: Adds this new piece Revision 2: Improves it Revision 3: Makes it just right Revision 4: Removes it.
  • Member since
    May 2019
  • 144 posts
Posted by BEAUSABRE on Saturday, December 5, 2020 6:13 PM

bogie_engineer
wonder if this had anything to do with the "pancake engine" used on some of the ca 1950 USN submarines. An example was the Albacore.  

Albacore and the Tang class. They were such failures, the USN cut the boats open , removed the GM engines and replaced them with FM units which required that the boats be lengthened. Since then, all US nuclear boats except the latest class have used FM engines as emergency "get you home" power if there was a problem with the reactor

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 12,243 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Sunday, December 6, 2020 9:55 AM

After all, FM engines did have a proven history in USN submarines.

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 14,894 posts
Posted by Overmod on Sunday, December 6, 2020 10:16 AM

CSSHEGEWISCH
After all, FM engines did have a proven history in USN submarines.

Where there is a whole ocean of cooling water, relatively constant load much of the time, and the lack of valve gear and its maintenance a positive advantage.

Remember that the 184A pancakes ran just fine.  It was the combination of jacking up the specific horsepower and putting the generator at the bottom that caused most of the grief.  

  • Member since
    January 2019
  • 825 posts
Posted by Erik_Mag on Sunday, December 6, 2020 12:16 PM

Being in-line engines, the FM's were an easy fit in the engine room. My recollection from a Dec 1971 tour of a Guppy boat was there wasn't a lot of space between the engines.

One other issue with any engine used for Naval propulsion is that the engines were usually running at the equivalent of run 4 or run 5.

  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,751 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Thursday, December 10, 2020 9:04 AM

Another loco proposed, not built.  GE C60-8E  

https://photos.app.goo.gl/1RMmCfq1PG11ef2i9

 

-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    December 2020
  • 3 posts
Posted by Woke Hoagland on Thursday, December 10, 2020 9:20 AM

oltmannd
Another loco proposed, not built.  GE C60-8E   https://photos.app.goo.gl/1RMmCfq1PG11ef2i9

Don, that predates the 'massively rebuilt E44' that was GE's swan song as a NEC electric freight engine, doesn't it -- it looks like, and I'd expect it is, an adaptation of the E60CP/H to freight service with only one cab and a hood for better 'rear vision' instead of a full-width carbody.  

With the shorter three-axle trucks installed from the beginning, not only after 'painful experience'... Whistling

Out of curiosity: was this spec'd as an 80mph engine as the passenger versions came to be?  Would have been highly useful on those midnight M&E trains north of Philadelphia...

  • Member since
    May 2019
  • 144 posts
Posted by BEAUSABRE on Tuesday, December 15, 2020 3:40 AM

Crawling around my layout are a GP3 and a SD3 (GP7 and SD7 kitbashed with F3 tall shroud fans and griils instead of fans for dynamic braking)and a low nosed FM H-36-66 (bashed H-24-66). I've though about H-30-44 and H-30-66's as well. 

  • Member since
    October 2015
  • 91 posts
Posted by longhorn1969 on Thursday, December 17, 2020 3:20 PM

Trains mag had this on the front cover, the Ace 3000 steam locomotive. A modern day steam locomotive.

http://www.trainweb.org/tusp/ult.html

 

  • Member since
    July 2008
  • 669 posts
Posted by Juniatha on Saturday, January 16, 2021 6:56 PM

All the contempory diesel type housing and the red paint cannot conceal that it continued with zero amending the one major draw-back of the classic steam locomotives: the very limited starting tractive effort: It has again but 8 drive wheels - just as any late Berkshire had - and with it's claimed 3000 ihp was to have even less horse power than the better of the classic engine had. Just to fill the analogy: it even has 6 idler wheels again and a 2x6 wheel tender. 

If that's so, and this is now said to be competitive - then why not re-build one of the quite clean and good looking (and proven!) L&N Berkshires, the M-1? They were being scapped way to early anyhow: just look at their tenders, there it's clearly noted to which date they were supposed to run!

=

 

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 14,894 posts
Posted by Overmod on Saturday, January 16, 2021 7:15 PM

Juniatha
why not re-build one of the quite clean and good looking (and proven!) L&N Berkshires, the M-1?

I'll second that in a heartbeat.  An article in Trains Magazine right about the date on that tender pointed out that these were effectively 4-8-4s built just a tad short to fit existing turntable length.  Emmas have been on my short list of favorite power ever since then.

As with the T1 Trust, the expense in making one of those sharp styled tenders can be largely avoided -- there is a complete one stored in New Haven, Kentucky...

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