I want to congratulate the folks over at the B&O Railroad Museum for this phenomenal restoration of an EA. This in my eyes has got to be one of the most beautiful pieces of rolling stock to ever grace the rails! Looking forward to seeing this beauty in 2027 for the Bicentennial. Kudos to all involved
It's stunning! I think it looks better than new!
I wonder, did they get it running?
Flintlock76 It's stunning! I think it looks better than new! I wonder, did they get it running?
My understanding was that it was just the body shell and trucks, the generators and traction motors having been traded in to EMD. They have No 50 as well, which is more historic if significantly less attractive...
Peter
M636CMy understanding was that it was just the body shell and trucks, the generators and traction motors having been traded in to EMD.
It would be fantastically expensive to get the Winton engines running, as some of the parts required special metallurgy and fabrication, and the engine not the most perfect design to keep running even with maintenance.
My understanding is that 50 has its original engines as well, but there is significant environmental damage inside the carbody. Discussion on RyPN about how much of the 'cosmetic work' will be on the inside.
Engine room photos, pre-restoration of course:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/127696208@N08/sets/72157651668416061/with/16804132859/
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
SD70Dude Engine room photos, pre-restoration of course: https://www.flickr.com/photos/127696208@N08/sets/72157651668416061/with/16804132859/
While it is far from an empty shell, it does lack the generators and traction motors as I believed and it is almost certainly not worth trying to run the Winton 201As which were hard to maintain when brand new.
M636C Flintlock76 It's stunning! I think it looks better than new! I wonder, did they get it running? My understanding was that it was just the body shell and trucks, the generators and traction motors having been traded in to EMD. They have No 50 as well, which is more historic if significantly less attractive... Peter
The 51 was traded to EMD in the early 1950's to become a E8m as were its brothers except for 52. EMD used the Main Generators and traction motors in the 'remanufactured' units that were rated at 2000 HP instead of the normal E8 at 2250 HP. EMD returned the unused parts to the B&O so the carbody could be used for display in the B&O Museum that was created in 1952 (or thereabouts) as a part of the B&O
The present day B&O Museum is a standalone organization. B&O 50 and 52 were sent to the Alton while it was under B&O ownership and stayed there after the B&O sold the Alton to the Mobile & Ohio in 1942 (or thereabouts). In addition to those diesels the Alton kept the lightweight train sets the B&O secured in the mid 1930's. One set was secured for the B&O Royal Blue and the other for the Alton's Abraham Lincoln. B&O did not like the ride qualities of its lightweight set and it was shipped to the Alton and ran as the Ann Rutledge as both Abe & Ann made daily round trips between St.Louis and Chicago. I believe #50 was donated to the National Museum of Transportation in St.Louis at the end of its days.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Yes, it is stunning. But think of all of the Brazilian carnubas that had to be sacrificed to make it look that way?
If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?
Absolutely fabulous! I can't wait to see her in person.
Jones 3D Modeling Club https://www.youtube.com/Jones3DModelingClub
Flintlock76 It's stunning! I think it looks better than new!
What a magnificent engine! Wow. Gorgeous.
The present day B&O Museum is a standalone organization. B&O 50 and 52 were sent to the Alton while it was under B&O ownership and stayed there after the B&O sold the Alton to the Mobile & Ohio in 1942 (or thereabouts). In addition to those diesels the Alton kept the lightweight train sets the B&O secured in the mid 1930's. One set was secured for the B&O Royal Blue and the other for the Alton's Abraham Lincoln. B&O did not like the ride qualities of its lightweight set and it was shipped to the Alton and ran as the Ann Rutledge as both Abe & Ann made daily round trips between St.Louis and Chicago. I believe #50 was donated to the National Museum of Transportation in St.Louis at the end of its days. - (Balt ACD)
I am probably confusing B&O 50 with the smaller but vaguely similar CNJ 1000. I have a clear recollection of a boxcab standing inside the B&O roundhouse.
I think the small side windows on 51 upset the balance a little, and that Santa Fe's E-1s which were othervise similar looked better as a result. But we are lucky to have 51...
The stainless steel headlight surround seemed to vary on the different EA units, and possibly at different times, but I think that on 51 is what it had in 1937.
50, along with ATSF's Amos and Andy (1A and 1B of 1935) were beautiful in their own way (not so much when they got mongrellized into transfer locomotives later in life.)
SD60MAC9500 Flintlock76 It's stunning! I think it looks better than new! I would've loved to be the hogger on this unit. I was born 45 years too late.. Well this might not be B&O related, but I couldn't resist.. EMC had some really talented folks back int the day. Santa Fe E1 is essentially the same loco as the EA. Not sure why the change in nomenclature.
The Santa Fe E1s had GE electrical gear, the B&O EAs used Westinghouse electrical gear. That may be the major difference between those units.
M636CI am probably confusing B&O 50 with the smaller but vaguely similar CNJ 1000. I have a clear recollection of a boxcab standing inside the B&O roundhouse.
Overmod M636C I am probably confusing B&O 50 with the smaller but vaguely similar CNJ 1000. I have a clear recollection of a boxcab standing inside the B&O roundhouse. Ingersoll-Rand 1000 is, in fact, next on the list to get the beauty treatment -- with C&O 490 after that.
M636C I am probably confusing B&O 50 with the smaller but vaguely similar CNJ 1000. I have a clear recollection of a boxcab standing inside the B&O roundhouse.
Ingersoll-Rand 1000 is, in fact, next on the list to get the beauty treatment -- with C&O 490 after that.
I saw CNJ 1000 several years ago myself. What struck me was "up close and personal" I could smell the diesel fuel even after all the years it's been on display! I couldn't help but wonder if 1000 was still operable.
"Beauty treatment?" It looked to be in a pretty good state of preservation to me and not needing any restoration at all, but I'm not the best judge of that. It's their unit after all.
I tend to favor preservation over restoration, but certainly not in all circumstances.
As an aside, the Henry Ford Museum also has an AGEIR boxcab, Ingersoll Rand 91, which is older than the C&O Allegheny also on display.
SSW9389 The Santa Fe E1s had GE electrical gear, the B&O EAs used Westinghouse electrical gear. That may be the major difference between those units.
EMD built twos sets of E3s E2s for the UP, IIRC the set of the City of LA used GE electrical gear and the set for the City of SF used Westinghouse electrical gear.
Erik_Mag SSW9389 The Santa Fe E1s had GE electrical gear, the B&O EAs used Westinghouse electrical gear. That may be the major difference between those units. EMD built twos sets of E3s for the UP, IIRC the set of the City of LA used GE electrical gear and the set for the City of SF used Westinghouse electrical gear.
EMD built twos sets of E3s for the UP, IIRC the set of the City of LA used GE electrical gear and the set for the City of SF used Westinghouse electrical gear.
The six contemporary UP SF 1,2,3 and LA 1,2,3 units were E2s
UP did get two E3s, an A+B, initially numbered LA 4 and 5 but soon renumbered.
The later triple units LA 4, 5 and 6 and SF 4, 5 and 6 were model E6.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7uLSMbt_UMI
mudchicken 50, along with ATSF's Amos and Andy (1A and 1B of 1935) were beautiful in their own way (not so much when they got mongrellized into transfer locomotives later in life.)
MC, are the 1A and 1B identical units , each with two cabs?
Lithonia Operator mudchicken 50, along with ATSF's Amos and Andy (1A and 1B of 1935) were beautiful in their own way (not so much when they got mongrellized into transfer locomotives later in life.) MC, are the 1A and 1B identical units , each with two cabs?
In that photo, taken before they entered service, yes!
Things began to dissappear during testing, firstly the truck shrouds, then all of the pilots except that at the front of unit 1A. Unit 1B had cooling problems and was fitted with additional roof mounted radiators. 1B could be fitted with a pilot to lead if required but rarely did. When 1B was renumbered 10 it became a regular lead unit again, but later it became a full B unit numbered 1A.
Finally both units became E8Bm units.
M636C Lithonia Operator mudchicken 50, along with ATSF's Amos and Andy (1A and 1B of 1935) were beautiful in their own way (not so much when they got mongrellized into transfer locomotives later in life.) MC, are the 1A and 1B identical units , each with two cabs? In that photo, taken before they entered service, yes! Things began to dissappear during testing, firstly the truck shrouds, then all of the pilots except that at the front of unit 1A. Unit 1B had cooling problems and was fitted with additional roof mounted radiators. 1B could be fitted with a pilot to lead if required but rarely did. When 1B was renumbered 10 it became a regular lead unit again, but later it became a full B unit numbered 1A. Finally both units became E8Bm units. Peter
At the point when the former 1B became a full-fledged B-unit numbered (very curiously, IMO) 1A, what was the former (original) 1A numbered?
What? Did ATSF hire a professional complicator? ???
Yes. I think Amos is a pretty cool-looking engine. Even if it does look a bit like an observation car.
Lithonia Operator M636C Lithonia Operator mudchicken 50, along with ATSF's Amos and Andy (1A and 1B of 1935) were beautiful in their own way (not so much when they got mongrellized into transfer locomotives later in life.) MC, are the 1A and 1B identical units , each with two cabs? In that photo, taken before they entered service, yes! Things began to dissappear during testing, firstly the truck shrouds, then all of the pilots except that at the front of unit 1A. Unit 1B had cooling problems and was fitted with additional roof mounted radiators. 1B could be fitted with a pilot to lead if required but rarely did. When 1B was renumbered 10 it became a regular lead unit again, but later it became a full B unit numbered 1A. Finally both units became E8Bm units. Peter At the point when the former 1B became a full-fledged B-unit numbered (very curiously, IMO) 1A, what was the former (original) 1A numbered? What? Did ATSF hire a professional complicator? ???
I didn't make this up.... Don't blame me I'm just trying to explain it....
1A became just 1 and 1B became 10 because there were E1A units numbered 2 to 9, some of which had B units numbered 2A and so on. When 10 became a B unit again it was renumbered 1A to match with the new standard.
I left out a whole renumbering where 1A became a transfer unit numbered 2611 (after the big centre cab Baldwins) with the number 2610 reserved for unit 1.
At this stage EMD offered to "rebuild" them as E8ms using just the generators and traction motors (as was done foe EA 51). These initially took the numbers of the old units but they were later numbered in the 80 series above the Alcos.
Thanks, Peter. That explains it!
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.