I belong to the group that believe "F" stands for "Fourteen"
Lets look at every other EMD code up to that time
S = six (hundred horsepower)
N = nine
T = twelve
E = eighteen
So the suggestion that F = fourteen (for 1350, since T was already taken) fits the series exactly....
Now it is agreed that locomotives with drawbars coupled in pairs were known as FT and those with couplers FS , so "Fourteen hundred horsepower Twin" and "Fourteen hundred horsepower Single" fit well.
It also explains why only "F" was used for later units once drawbars were no longer used.
A number of people don't like this explanation, but I've never heard a better one.
Peter
And the corn-fused Alco naming convention? (design vs. marketing versions)
M636CI belong to the group that believe "F" stands for "Fourteen"
I have no reason to doubt it - the logic is the same, the only question being which horsepower applies, 1,400 (1,350) or 1,500. Since the FT was first, then it's 1,400.
As is often the case, however, one might wonder if the builders even conceived of a day when the horsepower for an individual locomotive would exceed 4,000...
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
tree68 M636C I belong to the group that believe "F" stands for "Fourteen" I have no reason to doubt it - the logic is the same, the only question being which horsepower applies, 1,400 (1,350) or 1,500. Since the FT was first, then it's 1,400.
M636C I belong to the group that believe "F" stands for "Fourteen"
FT - Fourteen Thirteen
Makes as much sense as everything else.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
tree68As is often the case, however, one might wonder if the builders even conceived of a day when the horsepower for an individual locomotive would exceed 4,000...
You mean like the Baldwin 6000hp prototype of the late '30s?
(Granted they never put all eight genset units in at once, but you did say 'conceived', and Essl and Baldwin certainly did that and more.)
Overmod tree68 As is often the case, however, one might wonder if the builders even conceived of a day when the horsepower for an individual locomotive would exceed 4,000... You mean like the Baldwin 6000hp prototype of the late '30s?
tree68 As is often the case, however, one might wonder if the builders even conceived of a day when the horsepower for an individual locomotive would exceed 4,000...
IIRC, the GG-1's from the 1930's were good for 4,300HP continuous, but that was an electric...
GE was forecasting 4,000HP diesel's when the U25B was announced.
erikem "E" is for Econoline.
"E" is for Econoline.
I noticed this in an article and felt a bit silly asking this question, though I appreciate the discussion! I do thik its interesting that both firms designating a mainly freight machine with "F" and a mainly passenger machine with "E". Even if there is no connection.
The Beaverton, Fanno Creek & Bull Mountain Railroad
"Ruby Line Service"
I'm pretty sure it is just a coincdence. Keep in mind that the Econolines were and I think still are available in both passenger and cargo configurations.
Our family had a '69 E-350 Clubwagon from '69 to '72. Kind of a fun vehicle to drive wth manual brakes, manual steering and manual choke... I also had an F-250D for a number of years.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.