ALCo PA s

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

While it's a bit off topic, Mr. Frank's point of view in favor of the bulldog nose is nice to see, especially now that they are so rare. As I've mentioned in other threads, the bulldog nose is alive and well and living in Australia in several different versions, including a double-ender with two bulldog noses.

One place where PA's and FA's did not have to compete with E's and F's was Brazil. The Paulista had 3 PA's and the Central of Brazil had a small fleet of FA/FB's. Oddly enough, the DL-500 (World Locomotive) could not be found in Brazil.

[Anonymous]

P.S. - I apologize for submitting two consecutive replies, but I feel I have to stir up the pot at little bit - so much is written in the railfan press about the great looks of the Alco cab units (which I certainly agree with). Call me crazy, but I've always loved the look of the classic EMD bulldog nose - F units and E7, E8 and E9's (grew up watching them in Chicago suburban service on the Burlington, C&NW and Milwaukee Road, and freight service on the latter two and Soo Line). Seems like the EMD's don't get much praise simply because they were so much more common, but to be honest, I never saw PA's or FA's in service (did see FPA4's on Napa Valley Wine train though - beautiful units). I don't mean to alienate the Alco fans out there, but in my opinion, the EMD's are just as beautiful at the Alco's - I can't think of any diesel in North American railroad history that captures the power, grace, and beauty better than Santa Fe's passenger F-units (hey, just my opinion...)

[Anonymous]

Along the lines of what some of you have written above (excellent points by the way), there seems to be a clear consensus that: 1) the Alco PA's pulled a little better than equivalent h.p. EMD's; but 2) the EMD's greater reliability and lower maintenance costs more than offset whatever pulling advantage the Alco's had (at least when comparing those roads which had the choice of putting EMD's or Alco's on certain passenger runs.

Here's a real good question (at least in my humble opinion) - given that roads like Santa Fe, SP and Rio Grande all found that the Alco PA's had such a clear performance advantage, why didn't these roads get FA's for freight, and instead rely solely on EMD's F-units? I could be mistaken, but I don't believe any of these three roads had FA's on their rosters. This is especially puzzling on SP, which had multiple, repeat orders for PA's, and yet did not order any FA's (yet, SP purchased close to 800 F-units!!). Does anyone have any idea as to the seemingly inconsistent purchases for freight vs. passenger power in terms of Alco v. EMD?

[Anonymous]

Along the lines of what some of you have written above (excellent points by the way), there seems to be a clear consensus that: 1) the Alco PA's pulled a little better than equivalent h.p. EMD's; but 2) the EMD's greater reliability and lower maintenance costs more than offset whatever pulling advantage the Alco's had (at least when comparing those roads which had the choice of putting EMD's or Alco's on certain passenger runs.

Here's a real good question (at least in my humble opinion) - given that roads like Santa Fe, SP and Rio Grande all found that the Alco PA's had such a clear performance advantage, why didn't these roads get FA's for freight, and instead rely solely on EMD's F-units? I could be mistaken, but I don't believe any of these three roads had FA's on their rosters. This is especially puzzling on SP, which had multiple, repeat orders for PA's, and yet did not order any FA's (yet, SP purchased close to 800 F-units!!). Does anyone have any idea as to the seemingly inconsistent purchases for freight vs. passenger power in terms of Alco v. EMD?

[agentatascadero]

MW is correct, there were wide gaps in quality of the best train between different railroads, often on the same routes. Think Erie Limited vs 20th Century limited, or The Rebel vs Panama Limited. On some roads, the best train was an all stops local.

[Anonymous]

I recently found two pictures of D&RGW PA's on the California Zephy. The CZ was not a second-rate train.

Here are the links:
http://calzephyr.railfan.net/gallery/riograndecoming.jpg
http://calzephyr.railfan.net/gallery/phdrgpa1.jpg

See you around the forums,
Daniel Parks

[tpatrick]

Erie had 12 PA-1s and 2 PA-2s numbered 850 through 863. Some were painted in the black and yellow freight scheme, and others in the green passenger colors. All were used in commuter service and some occasionally made their way onto the mainline on the named trains. In later years they could be seen hauling freights as well. They lasted until 1969, when they were traded to EMD. I don't think any survived. As I recall, the PAs had the same single-chime air horn as the freight FAs.

[Anonymous]

I like PAs

I like Steam

There is room at the top

let all be kings. [:D] [;)] [:D]

[Anonymous]

Firstly, I've got a feeling that there are masses of NKP and LV fans who would not be too happy if you called their railroads' services inferior--in those days, any top line passenger train was pretty close the best which could be found.

And I agree--
Steam was, is, and always will be KING!

-Daniel Parks

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by CSSHEGEWISCH

While both NKP and LV used PA's exclusively in their passenger service, it would be a bit of a stretch to consider either of their passenger services to be top-line in the sense of ATSF or B&O.

It's interesting to note that L&N, which had a sizable fleet of 244-engined power, never bought any PA's.

In the sense of ATSF or B&O, true. But in terms of their systems, top-line as opposed to secondary services.

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

While both NKP and LV used PA's exclusively in their passenger service, it would be a bit of a stretch to consider either of their passenger services to be top-line in the sense of ATSF or B&O.

It's interesting to note that L&N, which had a sizable fleet of 244-engined power, never bought any PA's.

[agentatascadero]

On the SP PA's bumped E's from the Cascade and Overland routes because of their superior ability to pull the grades. On the D&RGW F's bumped PA's from the CZ, go figure. I am not aware that PA's ever led the Argonaut, diesel power was passenger geared F's in black widow paint. I've seen many instances on SP where E's and PA's were mixed in the same consist. I'd rather see a PA, but listen to an E, but none of these stinkers compares to STEAM.

[Anonymous]

Mr. Frank--

RE: your question regarding PAs on top-end trains

Among others:

Katy-Frisco's Texas Special (#1 train) also got the Katy PAs occasionally, although they tried to reserve them for the mostly-HW Katy Flyer and Bluebonnet, both of which made more stops and needed the quick acceleration and heavy-haul capability more. The MP/T&P/IGN used their big fleet of PAs on the Eagle fleet all the time.

TNO operated a big fleet of PAs on such trains as the Sunbeam/Hustler ("TX Daylight") DAL-HOU speedsters (probably fastest avg speed on the SP system), the Sunset (#1 LD train) E of ELP, Argonaut, etc.

NKP used PAs exclusively on their top-end pax trains.

The GCSF normally scheduled uses of PAs on the TX trains (including Tx Chief, CA Special, Angelo) were in heavily ATS territory where they routinely made 90 for long stretches with generally lightweight consists. TX Chief schedule was generally on a par with the Super's-not to be considered a secondary operation.

See some of the earlier posts this string for more info.

Hope this is useful.

[Anonymous]

Dear Mr. Frank,
I know that PA's could be found on the Chief (for years the number one train, and even at the end only number two), and it is my opinion that in all the Super Chief's the Santa Fe ran, a PA pulled at least one. Also, I would submit that the PA's found there way onto the Santa Fe's lower trains in part because those were the trains which had old heavyweight cars, and so needed the PA's.

See you around the forums,
Daniel

[Anonymous]

Thanks SSW9389! - Very helpful info! It would be interesting to know how well the F-7 with improved traction motors would compare to the PA1's at lower speeds, both in 6,000 h.p. sets - I believe I read somewhere that generally speaking on the Santa Fe, a 6,000 hp set of PA's could pull one more passenger car at the same speed as a 6,000 hp set of F-7's, which just goes to show that hp ratings are not always precise or universal.

Hate to state the obvious, but that comparison on the Rio Grande also goes to show that greater reliability (of the F-3's or F-7's) can more than offset a competing locomotive's slight performance advantage...This must be why I have never heard of the Santa Fe's PA's pinch hitting for F units the Super Chief (or on other "top of the line" passenger trains, such as for E units on the 20th Century, Broadway Limited, or City of Los Angeles). On the Santa Fe, I've only seen pictures of the PA's on the Grand Canyon, San Francisco Chief (west of Kansas City), the Fast Mail, and San Diegans, and I've read that at one time (probably very briefly in the late 40's or early 50's) they may have occasionally pulled the El Capitan.

If anyone is aware of other books or sources that generally compare steam or diesel locomotive performance tests on various roads, I would really appreciate it - I've read about the N&W A and Y-6b vs. EMD F-7's, NKP Berkshires v. F-7's, UP Big Boys and Challengers vs. EMD GP-9's, etc. I can understand why railroads do not like to release their performance comparisons of the latest EMD vs. GE locomotives, but it also seems that there is not a lot of info comparing locomotives which have long since been retired (F and E units v. PA's or FA's).

[SSW9389]

I recommend the book Early Diesel Daze by John B. McCall for accounts of testing the new PA-1s and F3s in the Fall of 1946. The PAs were better for both drawbar horsepower and drawbar pull across the speed range up to 100 MPH!

To further reinforce this point Santa Fe backed off from the F3 for a year to let EMD work the bugs out of them. No F3s were purchased by Santa Fe in 1947. The road did buy the Fairbanks-Morse Erie Built set and six sets of PAs in ABA configuration.

QUOTE: Originally posted by Mr. Frank

I've been seeing stories posted on various internet sites discussing performance comparisons Rio Grande made when shopping for new passenger power for the California Zephyr in the late '40's - EMD F-3's v. Alco PA's. Reportedly, the PA's outperformed the f-3 for the same given horsepower (3 unit PA at 6,000 h.p v. 4 unit F-3 at 6,000 h.p.). Apparently, the Alco's had superior traction motors, compliments of GE.

Does anyone have any other information about comparisons between PA's and EMD's F units or E units? Any books or magazines addressing this topic?

[Anonymous]

I've been seeing stories posted on various internet sites discussing performance comparisons Rio Grande made when shopping for new passenger power for the California Zephyr in the late '40's - EMD F-3's v. Alco PA's. Reportedly, the PA's outperformed the f-3 for the same given horsepower (3 unit PA at 6,000 h.p v. 4 unit F-3 at 6,000 h.p.). Apparently, the Alco's had superior traction motors, compliments of GE.

Does anyone have any other information about comparisons between PA's and EMD's F units or E units? Any books or magazines addressing this topic?

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by trainjunky29


I'm just curious as to who agrees with me that all paint schemes look better on a PA.

I certainly do! I think it's downright impossible for any paint scheme to not look good on a PA!

[espeefoamer]

QUOTE: Originally posted by trainjunky29

You are quite welcome, jhhtrainsplanes.

I'm just curious as to who agrees with me that all paint schemes look better on a PA.

See you around the forums,
Daniel

Espeefoamer agrees with you 100%!
[:D][:D][:D][:D][:D][:D][:D][:D][:D][:D][:D]

[Anonymous]

You are quite welcome, jhhtrainsplanes.

I'm just curious as to who agrees with me that all paint schemes look better on a PA.

See you around the forums,
Daniel

[passengerfan]

Sorry but the Napa Valley Wine train and the Grand Canyon RR units are MLW FPA4's former CN and Via Rail units. They ride on BB trucks and develop 1,800 hp thye engines are the more reliable 251's instead of the 244. CN operated the units from Sarnia East to the maritimes with Moncton being a major MLW shop for the railroad. Once rode the CN turbo in the winter when the unit was using a single FPA-4 for power and the train was only six minutes off the adverized between Toronto and Montreal.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by erikthered

I have seen photos of what look like PA's on the Napa Valley Wine Train and also on the Grand Canyon Railroad. I wonder if they have the same sort of maintenance problems everyone keeps talking about?

I am trying to wake up and don't have the time for a long answer here but in short if the railroad maintained the Alco according to the recommended maintaince they were as good as most any other locomotive. The 244 engine did have a problem with a few parts breaking. Alco tried to overcome this problem. The 251 engine had few problems and was very dependable, and also used less fuel than other engines of that time frame.

[Anonymous]

I have seen photos of what look like PA's on the Napa Valley Wine Train and also on the Grand Canyon Railroad. I wonder if they have the same sort of maintenance problems everyone keeps talking about?

[Anonymous]

You're quite welcome.[:D]

[Anonymous]

trainjunky29 (Daniel) [:)]

rdganthracite [:)]

drephpe [:)]

passengerfan [:)]

coalminer3 [:)]

csshegewisch [:)]

Thank you one and all for your good comments about Alco. [;)] I have been one of the few people who regularily defended Alco and apppreciate all the help I can get. [;)]

The 244 engine (as I have stated before) unfortunately wasn't the best engine available at the time. However the 251 was an excellent engine. But many railroad never gave Alco a second chance after the problems with the 244. The Century line of locos used the 251 and were and still are excellent locos. They are highly sought after by short lines. A short line near me owns 3 locos, one of them being an Alco. Our Canadian friends ran Alcos regularly up unto the end of the 1990s. The Century line proved to be excellent pulling locomotives and very dependable. I wish like everything that Alco was still making locos. I am not a GE fan, but yet I don't bad mouth them every few seconds either.

Guys, you are all Gentlemen in my book, thanks so very much for your help. [:D] [;)] [:)]

[passengerfan]

Probably the hottest schedule the PA's were assigned to was the Santa Fe Fast Mail. In this service the units were more often then not making up time something the units proved to be excellent at. This train carried a rider coach across Kansas otherwise operated sans coach betweeen Los Angeles and Chicago. With nearly every station a stop or conditional stop the Fast Mail more often than not was operating at track limits before slowing for the next station. Inspite of this and weather conditions from sub freezing to over the century mark the Alco's were the standard power assigned to this the most trying schedule on the Santa Fe and performed remarkably, they were rarely late at final destination and often as not arrived a few minutes early. Unlike Amtrak the schedules were not padded as todays trains are and the PA's performed flawlessly in this service until it ended. You can't ask much more than that or expect much more than that from any unit assigned.True the units required more maintenance but the overall performance on the Santa Fe was superb. Remember it was four ex Santa Fe units purchased by the D&H for further service. And the traction motors on the PA's required less maintenace than their EMD counterparts.

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

PRR and UP both regeared their PA's when they assigned them to freight service. The more robust GE electrical system may be the reason why PA's were better suited for secondary and local passenger trains and freight service.

Did any other roads operate PA's in suburban service besides Erie/EL?

[coalminer3]

IIRC, New Haven ran DL109s in dual service (psr by day; frt at night)

Also, let's not forget E-L running PAs in freight service.


work safe

[Anonymous]

To help fill out the list in the west-------

ATSF also regularly assigned PA's on the SF Chief and the connecting TX services (Calif. Special) to HOU and FTW (the DAL cars went on 111/112 for the last 32 miles, pulled by E's and F's) and got good service from them.--lasted until the trains came off in 1968-71.

T&NO (SP lines east of ELP) had a whole fleet of them, and they held down the Sunset, Argonaut, Sunbeam, Hustler and most of the other schedules after dieselization east of ELP.

And don't forget Cotton Belt's 2 PAs, painted "modified Daylight"--silver roof--that went along with the only F unit (FP7) on an SP-owned property painted Daylight (well, actually, also "modified Daylight")--that was their entire streamlined pax fleet, the rest were boiler-equipped RS3's. Pulled HW's and Pullman/Bradleys also painted "modified daylight"--the reflective silver roof really helped the A/C.

[passengerfan]

The PA required more maintenance than the E units mostly with the 244 engine. Remember the EMD E-3 through E-7 only developed 2,000 hp using two engines of 1,000 hp each. While the Alco PA developed 2,000 hp with a single engine. This made the Alco PA less expensive initially but maintenace costs over the life of the unit probably evened things out. The PA could be equipped with dynamic braking something only available on the E8 and E9 models from EMD. Some railroads had excellent maintenace programs and their incidence of road failures of PA's was practically non existent.
Railroads that received good service from their PA's were Santa Fe who assigned the units to the All Pullman Chief in A-B-A sets. Another regular assignment for the PA's on the AT&SF was the Grand Canyon and Texas Chief. The last regular assignment on the Santa Fe was the San Joaquin Valley service between Oakland and Bakersfield. The AT&SF Pa's were never assigned to the Super Chief or El Capitan these trains being EMC later EMD assignments.
The SP found the PA's with dynamic brakes able to maintain the hot schedule of the Shasta Daylight much better than the E units built for the trains. The same was true for the CASCADE the all pullman overnight train on the Oakland - Portland run. The PA's were also assigned to the City of San Francisco between Oakland pier and Ogden. The units served both of these railroads faithfully for many years in passenger service.
The Union Pacific and other railroads assigned their PA's to secondary passenger trains and later reassigned the units to freight service before going to scrap. Other Western Roads that operated PA's were the Katy, MP and D&RGW. Major operators of the PA's in the east were the NYC, NKP, PRR and SOU. The NYNH&H operated PA's in passenger service during the day and freight service at night. The D&H operated four former AT&SF units the only PA's ever operated by three roads as they eventuallty ended up in Mexico and it is one of these being rebuilt in Portland.