Were Alco Diesels "Bad" Locomotives

[SSW9389]

erikem

 

As far as the R&D disadvantage for Alco, they were the first of the big three to use traction alternators instead of generators.

 - Erik

 

This statement needs some qualification. Alco was the first of the big three to use a traction alternator in a production locomotive: ACL C630 #2011 built in July 1965. That Alco locomotive was built after EMD test locomotives #462 F9Am, 433 GP40X, and 434, 434A-H SD40X, all were equipped with traction alternators.  

[erikem]

Desert Rat

As for being "pullers" didn't the Westinghouse gear in BLW and FM locomotives give them the rep for being better than EMD at low-speed/high-tonnage work?  Especially drag and transfer work?   

Westinghouse traction motors had six poles as opposed to the four poles used on GE and GM motors (with the orignal GM motors being more or less copies of GE motors). For a given frame size, this should allow for a higher flux density on the poles, which would translate into a higher torque for a given armature current.

As far as the R&D disadvantage for Alco, they were the first of the big three to use traction alternators instead of generators.

 - Erik

[Desert Rat]

Another thing I doubt Alco (amd MLW/Bombardier) had access to was GE's full catalog of electrical gear.  That "partnership" of Alco/GE gave Alco (and the others) no incentive to do R&D to the degree that GM and GE did, let alone actual production in-house electrical gear.

As for being "pullers" didn't the Westinghouse gear in BLW and FM locomotives give them the rep for being better than EMD at low-speed/high-tonnage work?  Especially drag and transfer work?   

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

dirtyhands

tree huggers should stay in the woods & leave railroading to those of us who know how a little smoke never killed anything

 

Considering repeating that to the survivors of those who died from lung cancer.

[BigJim]

dirtyhands

tree huggers should stay in the woods & leave railroading to those of us who know how a little smoke never killed anything

Then you haven't rode a GE with the long hood forward downhill in dynamic brake! What a pukin' ride!

[BigJim]

243129

Is that Fairbanks Morse or an ALCO?

It is an ALCO T6

[M636C]

BDA

The Alcos in NSW Australia were basically the conversion from steam to diesel , I was told that Goodwin built Alco locomotives were cheaper than Clyde built EMD units but there were a few "GMs" about to make it look not one sided .

As mentioned above the NSW 80 class were out around the end of the 70s and still being built around the time of the first 81 classes .

Pretty hard for a 12 251 Alco powered unit to compete with a Clyde EMD unit with a 16 645 turbocharged donk and Dash 2 and super series .

By 1980 and virtually new the 80s were basically garbage by comparison and effectively nailed the lid on the Alco coffin in NSW . To be fair prior to adhesion enhancements like super series our lighter locomotives probably couldn't put much more than 2000-2500 Hp usefully to the rail . 

 

The key item that brought EMD back in Australia was super series adhesion control.  An existing unit, effectively an SD38 that only weighed 108 long tons was fitted with the full SD50 traction system, alternator, motors and control gear. This was then sent out on to steep grades on wet days and was found to be able to haul around 50% more under bad adhesion conditions. This convinced the doubters and EIGHTY JT26C-2SS units (the 81 class) were ordered. The first arrived about 37 years ago and they took over every difficult task on the NSW system. With newer and more powerful units taking over intermodal and export coal traffic these have gravitated to grain traffic (which some had run since new) and they are still capable of hauling a full load of forty 84 long ton gross hoppers on a 1in 66 grade every day. These are the units I referred to in the "Transition' thread.

 

But back to the Alcos, the CE 618 and DL500G, known in NSW as the 80 class and the 442 class respectively. These are basically modernised RSD-12s but they only weigh 120 long tons (a bit less for the DL500G).

 

As BDA indicated, that power and weight gave optimum performance in most conditions on steep grades with heavy trains.

 

Alcos gave good performance if they were understood and maintained properly. They were a good choice for an operator transitioning from steam with trained mechanics who could attend to their minor problems.

 

One thing not mentioned was that the were economical on fuel. Alcos were always more economical than locomotives with blower EMD engines, maybe by a third depending on the duty.

 

The 251 egnine was tough. It needed more maintenance than a 567 or 645, but for a small operator with a few units, their mechanics could look after the Alco's needs, and they would save on fuel costs compared to an EMD. But a 251 would generally last longer than an FDL, and this partly explains the number of Alcos still around compared to U boats and Dash7s.

 

The Dash 8 is the first GE that has been good enough to give a heavy overhaul, often requiring a new engine crankcase.

 

But in Australia, there are a number of these Alcos still around, although they are disappearing from their original operator Pacific National. 8108 replaced 8050 as the passenger terminal switcher in Adelaide.

 

Half a dozen of the DL500G are still found in grain traffic with a similar number of the CE 618s. Twelve DL 500Gs were completely rebuilt as GEs with FDL12s rated at 3000HP and these have found consistent work. Nine more were rebuilt with new frames as a sort of SD40-2 but retaining the GE752 motors.

 

It will be a while before these Alcos disappear completely, and even longer before the JT26C-2SS are replaced.

 

Peter

[BDA]

The Alcos in NSW Australia were basically the conversion from steam to diesel , I was told that Goodwin built Alco locomotives were cheaper than Clyde built EMD units but there were a few "GMs" about to make it look not one sided .

As mentioned above the NSW 80 class were out around the end of the 70s and still being built around the time of the first 81 classes .

Pretty hard for a 12 251 Alco powered unit to compete with a Clyde EMD unit with a 16 645 turbocharged donk and Dash 2 and super series .

By 1980 and virtually new the 80s were basically garbage by comparison and effectively nailed the lid on the Alco coffin in NSW . To be fair prior to adhesion enhancements like super series our lighter locomotives probably couldn't put much more than 2000-2500 Hp usefully to the rail . 

[charlie hebdo]

GMAC financing was available for EMD locomotives.  I am not sure if ALCO, F-M, Baldwin or Lima had such a treasure chest available.

[dirtyhands]

tree huggers should stay in the woods & leave railroading to those of us who know how a little smoke never killed anything

[wjstix]

Leo_Ames

Weren't they even an online customer for the Milwaukee Road, with the Milwaukee Road's mainline there used as a test track for FM?

I'm sure that close proximity influenced the Milwaukee Road's affinity for FM products for over 35 years.

 

 

I believe that was also true for New York Central and Alco (located in Schenectady NY).

 

From what I've read, GM/EMD products seemed to be more durable, plus they seemed to have a better communication and presence with the railroads. I seem to recall someone saying that if a railroad had bought FTs back in the forties and needed parts or were having trouble, EMD would send people to the railroad like the next day, because they wanted to find out what was wrong so they could correct it on any future engines they made.

[CandOforprogress2]

The fact that Alcos are still running today past there prime and that Alco is outtta business says something.

[Leo_Ames]

Looking through stuff, five times longer was typical to replace a piston liner than on an EMD (Not to mention of course the need for an overhead crane).

Helps put it into perspective how significant this issue was with the top crankshaft having to be removed. Even if piston liners only needed to be replaced with EMD-like frequency, it was much more involved and time consuming.

And alas, the interval between replacement was anything but EMD-like.

CSSHEGEWISCH

In the case of Milwaukee's FM switchers, it probably helped that Beloit wasn't that far away.

 

Undoubtedly

Weren't they even an online customer for the Milwaukee Road, with the Milwaukee Road's mainline there used as a test track for FM?

I'm sure that close proximity influenced the Milwaukee Road's affinity for FM products for over 35 years.

[243129]

BigJim

JUNK!!!

Not junk!

 

Is that Fairbanks Morse or an ALCO?

Not junk.

 

[243129]

BigJim

JUNK!!!

 

I agree. EMD is far and away the very best diesel locomotive. GE, especially the 'u-boats', were not  from an operator standpoint suitable freight locomotives. I would venture to say that even Scott Pruitt would have banned the ALCOs.

[BigJim]

JUNK!!!

Not junk!

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

In the case of Milwaukee's FM switchers, it probably helped that Beloit wasn't that far away.

[Leo_Ames]

Yeah, that was a major issue.

Fairbanks Morse eventually addressed it to a degree with engine improvements that decreased the need to to replace liners and an engine exchange program that let all the actual engine work be done at Beloit with the backshop just removing and replacing the engine. But it was always going to be more more expensive and involved than similar work on a EMD. Definitely the OP's achilles heel in railroad service.

As a testament perhaps to their belated improvements, the Milwaukee Road's switcher fleet with new OP's from a mid 1960's or so factory rebuild program survived the 1970's in large numbers, despite being on the hit list for most of their final decade which kept them out of the backshop and meant an automatic retirement if significant work was called for. 

It was only the 1980 retrenchment that finally did them in when the Milwaukee Road suddenly had a large power surplus, allowing them to retire the remaining Fairbanks Morse fleet. 

[oltmannd]

Leo_Ames

And at least in the case of Fairbanks Morse, teething troubles crippled them

Replacing a liner, which is something you will do more than a few times between overhauls, required removing the top crankshaft!  Have to unbolt all those rod and main bearing caps, lift the crank, slide out the offending liner, then redo all those bearing caps. 

On an EMD, you just unbolt one rods, take off the crab nuts, unbolt some jewelry and out she comes.

[Leo_Ames]

Just glanced through this, but haven't seen it mentioned that it really depends on the type of service.

For high speed passenger service and mainline freights, Alco and the other minority makes weren't too well off. But the switchers were tough beasts that didn't require lots of tlc and often lasted many years.

What killed many a minority switcher wasn't reliability nor overall condition as much as it was the cascade effect of geeps being demoted from road service, a decline even back then in the need for switchers, and the mechanical department's desire to cut costs by reducing the variety of parts that need to be kept in inventory. 

And the roadswitchers seemed to excel in the jobs that on the surface would seem the toughest out there. Slow heavy trains were their forte, thanks in part to GE electrical systems and diesel engines that didn't like high speed running but would pull hard all die long for years on end. They lived in steel mills, ore roads, and so on much longer than they did in more mundane types of service.

And at least in the case of Fairbanks Morse, teething troubles crippled them. By the time the problems were largely ironed out, FM was in corporate turmoil, dieselization was virtually complete and the country was in a recession leaving a dismal market for new power, and most roads saw more value at that point in eliminating oddballs than they did in paying for factory upgrades to cure their woes. 

[243129]

Junk.

[243129]

From an operator's standpoint EMD wins hands down as the best diesel locomotive, ALCO, GE, Fairbanks Morse not so good.

 Here is a GE and ALCO.

[BigJim]

The question was asked:

Were Alco Diesels "Bad" Locomotives(?)

Compared to anything GE, the RS11 was heads above!!! 

[dirtyhands]

you guess right

[SD70Dude]

MLW lasted a lot longer in Canada, where it was difficult for GE to compete due to tariffs on imported equipment (this is pre-NAFTA, of course).  But poor reliability did them in eventually, too.  The M636 was their SD50, only sooner.  Turns out you could only push the 251 so far.

GE has been quite ruthless in ending parts support for their older models.  They ceased supporting the Dash-7's about 10 or 15 years ago, to say nothing of the Universal series.

Off topic, but I happened upon this old Dash-7 thread.  I especially enjoyed the last post by Mr. Randy Stahl:

http://cs.trains.com/trn/f/111/t/46131.aspx

[NorthWest]

There are, but a lot of that is shortlines that dieselized with first generation Alco castoffs found it natural to transition to second generation models when those were sold off. GE's switchers were different enough that railroads that had them didn't tend to buy U-boats.

Alco's failure also had a lot to do with its status as a relatively small outfit trying to compete with two major congolomorations that had the size and financing arms to make their locomotives cheaper than Alco could in an era where railroads were desperate.

The 244 had its problems, but Alco would've been fine had GE not entered the market.

[Lyon_Wonder]

My guess is there's more Alcos RS and Centuries still in operating condition than GE's first generation Universal series.

[SD70Dude]

The PA also featured a very capable dynamic braking system, which EMD had yet to offer on E units at the time.  That was a big factor in some railroads (Santa Fe, Southern Pacific) deciding to purchase PA's.  

The four D&H units were rebuilt with V12 251's, and rated at 2400 HP.  Doyle McCormack's NKP 190 retains this configuration, but now contains a donor engine from a ex-BC Rail M420B 

[BaltACD]

My recollections stand corrected.

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

The heavier electrical gear explains why a fair number of PA's wound up in freight service as passenger schedules were discontinued.