Trains.com

High Hood Locomotives

24816 views
85 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Saturday, September 12, 2020 9:57 AM

The window on the GP9B is for the benefit of the hostler when the unit is being moved in the shop area.  The short hood on the Kennecott GP39-2 is higher than usual but also note the extended height of the cab.

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    July 2008
  • 2,325 posts
Posted by rdamon on Friday, September 11, 2020 4:34 PM

Only think I can think that is close is the GP9B

https://www.railpictures.net/photo/58715/

  • Member since
    April 2001
  • From: Roanoke, VA
  • 2,019 posts
Posted by BigJim on Friday, September 11, 2020 4:20 PM

Overmod

 

 
Lithonia Operator
Could you post a link to a photo of a road switcher, preferably a Geep, with windows in the high short hood?

 

I believe they were little round windows, like small portholes.

 

https://akronrrclub.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/ns-l11-1-march-25-bellevue-x.jpg

https://farm5.static.flickr.com/4592/39349955452_2a3bcfb9db.jpg

You'll see examples with these painted over but the circular rim still visible, and examples that appear to have oversized grommets with marker lights installed in them.

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/8f/56/44/8f5644f012310309acddd1c4e0131195.jpg

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e3/USA_RD0_152_NS_2882.jpg

 

Those aren't windows. They are where class lights were supposed to go.

.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Friday, September 11, 2020 3:51 PM

Lithonia Operator
Could you post a link to a photo of a road switcher, preferably a Geep, with windows in the high short hood?

I believe they were little round windows, like small portholes.

https://akronrrclub.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/ns-l11-1-march-25-bellevue-x.jpg

https://farm5.static.flickr.com/4592/39349955452_2a3bcfb9db.jpg

You'll see examples with these painted over but the circular rim still visible, and examples that appear to have oversized grommets with marker lights installed in them.

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/8f/56/44/8f5644f012310309acddd1c4e0131195.jpg

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e3/USA_RD0_152_NS_2882.jpg

  • Member since
    July 2008
  • 2,325 posts
Posted by rdamon on Friday, September 11, 2020 3:07 PM

Then there was Kennecott's GP38s

http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=2675491

Would that be a medium-high short hood?

  • Member since
    May 2019
  • 1,768 posts
Posted by MMLDelete on Friday, September 11, 2020 1:02 PM

mudchicken

 

 
zugmann
 
longhorn1969

Why the high hood design in the first place? Didn't the design hamper the engineers sightlines? 

Some had a steam generator in there.  

 

 

The original ALCo HH- units had the prime mover (531 or 539) mounted on top of the frame (bass acwards). Later prime movers like the 241 and 244 were slightly less tall and the engine sumps were down in the frame.

 

The high short hoods (starting with the RS-1, indeed had a steam generator in there, a few tried dynamic brakes in there (lead balloon), branchline mail/ company mail and a lot of radio gear (pre-transistor) showed-up there as well. Some tried to stuff extra brakies in there and added little windows.

 

Could you post a link to a photo of a road switcher, preferably a Geep, with windows in the high short hood? I've never seen that.

I can hear the other guys razzing that brakeman. "Hey, if we crash, you'll be the first to know!"

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Friday, September 11, 2020 10:04 AM

The GR12 (EMD export model) had the dynamic brake located in the high hood.

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Denver / La Junta
  • 10,820 posts
Posted by mudchicken on Friday, September 11, 2020 12:11 AM

zugmann
 
longhorn1969

Why the high hood design in the first place? Didn't the design hamper the engineers sightlines? 

Some had a steam generator in there.  

The original ALCo HH- units had the prime mover (531 or 539) mounted on top of the frame (bass acwards). Later prime movers like the 241 and 244 were slightly less tall and the engine sumps were down in the frame.

The high short hoods (starting with the RS-1, indeed had a steam generator in there, a few tried dynamic brakes in there (lead balloon), branchline mail/ company mail and a lot of radio gear (pre-transistor) showed-up there as well. Some tried to stuff extra brakies in there and added little windows.

Mudchicken Nothing is worth taking the risk of losing a life over. Come home tonight in the same condition that you left home this morning in. Safety begins with ME.... cinscocom-west
  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,919 posts
Posted by blue streak 1 on Thursday, September 10, 2020 6:48 PM

About high hoods.   The original NS ( CLT = Norfolk ) received 3 diesels and cut the short hoods down for better crew visibility so the story goes.  SOU RR took control of the original NS and prompltly put high hoods back on.  Story was too many crews requesting the short hood units to lead when available ?

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Wednesday, September 9, 2020 10:36 PM

oltmannd
When I first started on Conrail, I worked with some guys who had been in the mechanical dept in Chicago on the PRR in the late 60's.  They were still using FM switchers there.  They had nicknamed them "blowtorches".  The reason was they were prone to liner scoring and would accumulate lots of lube oil between the pistons when idling.  Once they notched out and got hot, the oil would ignite and you'd get flames out the stack.

On an EMD, they would just pull and replace a power assembly - a few hours work for a couple of mechanics, at the most.  On an FM, you had to pull the entire top crank, including disconnecting every top rod, just to pull the one offending cylinder liner - a ton of work, so they's just avoid it as long as possible.

They said the crews had to be careful pulling cars out of Union Station - you didn't want the blow torch effect under the canopy.

The other, unrelated story I remember was my boss telling me it was his job to watch them back the Broadway into the station across a broken diamond into Union Station everyday - his fault if it derailed.

When I was first transferred to Baltimore in 1972 - the yard power for Baltimore Terminal was predominately FM's.  Sprayed oil all over every thing.  A stack fire every now and again.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Wednesday, September 9, 2020 9:09 PM

Paul Milenkovic

 

 
Overmod

 

 
Lithonia Operator
What is an OP?

 

Here, opposed-piston engine.  This has no cylinder head or valves; think of it as two conjugated inline engine blocks mounted together with their piston crowns facing each other, dished just enough to form a roughly lenticular combustion chamber at the point of nearest approach.  The blocks have scavenge ports reasonably near BDC, with one for air and the other for exhaust; when the opposed pistons are nearly at the bottom of their strokes (they are not phased 180 degrees opposite, but within about 15 degrees of being so) the charge air displaces the products of combustion, and fills the cylinder with clean air just as the pistons start back up and cut off the ports.  No valves, no valve train, all timing handled by very robust and strong spiral-bevel gearing between the two crankshafts.  (In most locomotive practice the generator is driven only from the lower crank, with the scavenge blower or supercharger driven from the upper one -- a vertical shaft conjugates the two for the remainder of power transfer.

 

It may have occurred to you by now that it would be nifty to do this with fork-and-blade V engines rather than mere inlines.  And lo and behold! welcome to the Napier Deltic, developed for torpedo boats, put in perhaps the greatest and most iconic of British locomotives, and at the heart of one of Tree's most favorite pieces of apparatus...

 

 

 

Opposed-piston was a great idea, I guess, until you had to change a "power assembly", that is, a cylinder liner, the piston that goes in it and the connecting rod?

You have to just about take the whole engine apart?  Must have made Fairbanks Morse locomotives not very popular with the maintenance department.

 

When I first started on Conrail, I worked with some guys who had been in the mechanical dept in Chicago on the PRR in the late 60's.  They were still using FM switchers there.  They had nicknamed them "blowtorches".  The reason was they were prone to liner scoring and would accumulate lots of lube oil between the pistons when idling.  Once they notched out and got hot, the oil would ignite and you'd get flames out the stack.

On an EMD, they would just pull and replace a power assembly - a few hours work for a couple of mechanics, at the most.  On an FM, you had to pull the entire top crank, including disconnecting every top rod, just to pull the one offending cylinder liner - a ton of work, so they's just avoid it as long as possible.

They said the crews had to be careful pulling cars out of Union Station - you didn't want the blow torch effect under the canopy.

The other, unrelated story I remember was my boss telling me it was his job to watch them back the Broadway into the station across a broken diamond into Union Station everyday - his fault if it derailed.

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

  • Member since
    July 2004
  • 2,741 posts
Posted by Paul Milenkovic on Wednesday, September 9, 2020 8:02 PM

Overmod

 

 
Lithonia Operator
What is an OP?

 

Here, opposed-piston engine.  This has no cylinder head or valves; think of it as two conjugated inline engine blocks mounted together with their piston crowns facing each other, dished just enough to form a roughly lenticular combustion chamber at the point of nearest approach.  The blocks have scavenge ports reasonably near BDC, with one for air and the other for exhaust; when the opposed pistons are nearly at the bottom of their strokes (they are not phased 180 degrees opposite, but within about 15 degrees of being so) the charge air displaces the products of combustion, and fills the cylinder with clean air just as the pistons start back up and cut off the ports.  No valves, no valve train, all timing handled by very robust and strong spiral-bevel gearing between the two crankshafts.  (In most locomotive practice the generator is driven only from the lower crank, with the scavenge blower or supercharger driven from the upper one -- a vertical shaft conjugates the two for the remainder of power transfer.

 

It may have occurred to you by now that it would be nifty to do this with fork-and-blade V engines rather than mere inlines.  And lo and behold! welcome to the Napier Deltic, developed for torpedo boats, put in perhaps the greatest and most iconic of British locomotives, and at the heart of one of Tree's most favorite pieces of apparatus...

 

Opposed-piston was a great idea, I guess, until you had to change a "power assembly", that is, a cylinder liner, the piston that goes in it and the connecting rod?

You have to just about take the whole engine apart?  Must have made Fairbanks Morse locomotives not very popular with the maintenance department.

If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Wednesday, September 9, 2020 4:05 PM

longhorn1969
Why the high hood design in the first place? Didn't the design hamper the engineers sightlines?

Check the sightlines from the Class 1 steam locomotives.  Many carriers when purchasing the first generation of GP locomotives had them configured to run long hood forward - with nominally the same sightlines as the steam engines they were replacing.  Other carriers orders their first generation GP's to operate short hood forward.  It wasn't until EMD started selling the GP30's in the early 60's that low hoods on the short hood end operating forward became common place.  

Some carriers converted there 1st generation GP's to have a low hood for the operator on the short hood end, WM springs to mind.  Some carriers (NW & SOU) ordered their 2nd generation GP's to have high hoods on the short end because the low hood was a 'extra cost option' - they didn't stop this practice until the high short hood became the 'extra cost option'.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    January 2019
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 9,728 posts
Posted by Flintlock76 on Wednesday, September 9, 2020 3:58 PM

longhorn1969

Why the high hood design in the first place? Didn't the design hamper the engineers sightlines?

 

No more than a steam engine did.  In fact, if you look at some makes of First Generation diesels like Baldwins, Alco's, and FM's you'll see the configuration of the locomotive is very similar to a steam locomotive's, that is, cab in the back, all the machinery up front.  

Here's a Baldwin VO-1000 for example:

http://rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=1126744  

Besides when some old-time engineers were asked about restricted sightlines the usual reply was, "No big deal, you can't stop on a dime anyway!"

  • Member since
    January 2002
  • From: Canterlot
  • 9,575 posts
Posted by zugmann on Wednesday, September 9, 2020 1:39 PM

longhorn1969

Why the high hood design in the first place? Didn't the design hamper the engineers sightlines?

 

Some had a steam generator in there. 

It's been fun.  But it isn't much fun anymore.   Signing off for now. 


  

The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any

  • Member since
    October 2015
  • 103 posts
Posted by longhorn1969 on Wednesday, September 9, 2020 1:37 PM

Why the high hood design in the first place? Didn't the design hamper the engineers sightlines?

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Tuesday, August 18, 2020 8:24 PM

fire5506
The LIRR had exhaust deflectors on the sides of the long hood of their C-420s for this reason...

Not elephant ears, though.

http://www.trainsarefun.com/lirr/c420/C420_smoke_deflectors-L2alcastelli.jpg

http://www.trainsarefun.com/lirr/c420/C420_smoke_deflectors-L2alcastelli-2.jpg

I still can't believe they delivered the first units with the air horns where they were!  What you see in the picture is the relocation and even that was plenty loud...

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 27 posts
Posted by fire5506 on Tuesday, August 18, 2020 8:03 PM

Paul of Covington

 The LIRR had exhaust delfectors on the sides of the long hood of their C-420s for this reason, the idea was dleflectors would lift the exhaust high enough that it would go over the cab. 

Richard

 
SD70Dude
Exhaust getting into the cab when running long hood forward is still a problem today.

 

   Sounds like a good argument for elephant ears!

 

  • Member since
    August 2020
  • 2 posts
Posted by M G Clark on Tuesday, August 18, 2020 9:18 AM

The HMCR also has an active U23B that was originally L&N 2800, but it is a low nose. It has also been SBD 2800, CSX 3301, CSX 9554, VLIX 9554, TISH 9554, and now HMCR 9554.

Both the B23-7 and U23B are currently located at the HMCR's satellite railcar storage facility at the former GM/Delphi campus near Decatur, Alabama and located adjacent to the North-South CSX mainline just north of the junction with Norfolk Southern's East-West mainline where it crosses the Tennessee River on a bridge shared with CSX. The main HMCR operation uses former NC&St.L (later L&N) tracks running North-South to the south of the NS mainline where it runs through Huntsville, AL.

  • Member since
    August 2020
  • 2 posts
Posted by M G Clark on Tuesday, August 18, 2020 9:08 AM

The Huntsville-Madison County Railroad in North Alabama is a shortline still actively using a high short Hood GE B23-7. It was originally Southern Railway 3986 and still retains that road number.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Sunday, August 16, 2020 1:14 PM

Paul of Covington
 
SD70Dude
Exhaust getting into the cab when running long hood forward is still a problem today.

Even upside-down those don't seem to have worked too well! Mischief
  • Member since
    July 2010
  • From: Louisiana
  • 2,310 posts
Posted by Paul of Covington on Saturday, August 15, 2020 11:08 PM

SD70Dude
Exhaust getting into the cab when running long hood forward is still a problem today.

   Sounds like a good argument for elephant ears!

_____________ 

  "A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner

  • Member since
    May 2019
  • 1,768 posts
Posted by MMLDelete on Saturday, August 15, 2020 8:29 PM

Leo_Ames

It stands for opposed piston, a type of diesel engine layout popularized by Fairbanks-Morse for US Navy submarines in the late 1930's (With the Fairbanks Morse 38 8-1/8 diesel engine still a fixture in all but our Virginia class nuclear attack submarines as emergency generators, along with some of our surface fleet).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opposed-piston_engine

This family of engines from Fairbanks-Morse went on to make a brief splash in the North American railroading scene from the end of WWII through the early 1960's when the last locomotive order was finished in Wisconsin for Mexico.

Past rail and naval installations, they were a very popular choice in the latter days of the 1st generation of Canadian Seaway construction when Canada was enjoying a flurry of shipbuilding with the opening of the new St. Lawrence Seaway. As steam turbines fell out of favor in the mid 60's, Fairbanks-Morse OP's were often selected through about 1974 or so for Canadian ships.

And while I don't know much about Soviet locomotives, supposedly reverse engineered clones were commonplace.

 

Thanks, Leo. And OM.

  • Member since
    September 2013
  • 2,505 posts
Posted by caldreamer on Saturday, August 15, 2020 4:57 PM

The FM OP engeings could really produce a lot of torque depending how they were geared.  My friend Bob Bailey and I were in the Santa Clara tower and watched as an H12-44 pulled 150 cars out of the SP's Santa clara yard.  and push them back down into the bowl.  It smoked like an Alco and roaded.  Was going maybe 5 mph, but it did the job.  I counted the cars and could not beleive my eyes that the little switcher could move that many cars.

    Caldreamer

  • Member since
    December 2017
  • From: I've been everywhere, man
  • 4,269 posts
Posted by SD70Dude on Saturday, August 15, 2020 4:40 PM

Overmod

Napier Deltic

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napier_Deltic

They were among the greatest British diesels because they actually ran reliably (must not have used any Lucas products either).  Still, leave it to the British to come up with a overly complex design like that.

Greetings from Alberta

-an Articulate Malcontent

  • Member since
    December 2017
  • From: I've been everywhere, man
  • 4,269 posts
Posted by SD70Dude on Saturday, August 15, 2020 4:33 PM

Overmod
Flintlock76
Interestingly, I've never heard of any other FM OP engined unit having that problem.

They all did.  You're talking about locomotives with first-generation governors and unsophisticated pressure-charging, using mechanical injection in a two-stroke valveless design.  Then there are all the oil issues.  An OP in a locomotive is going to stink a lot of the time.

Mind you, this was a problem with EMD engines, too, just less discussed, and not as much exhaust mass flow per prime mover 'ahead' of the crew.  To my knowledge no one on an FM was actually asphyxiated by the exhaust, as one crew on an EMD consist was...

Exhaust getting into the cab when running long hood forward is still a problem today.

The farther the stack is from the cab, the worse this problem is, and FMs had their stacks at the far end of the engine from the cab.  GE's are the same, and the FDL engine's exhaust just drifts lazily up out of the stack and sinks down onto the cab when running backward.  GEVO exhaust isn't nearly as thick, but it is still attracted to the cab in the same manner.

Turbocharged EMDs have the stack at the near end of the engine, and the 2-stroke exhaust races up out of the stack with much more force, so it will miss the cab altogether.

Non-turbocharged EMDs are somewhere in between, though ours tend to be quite smoky as most suffer from age and poor maintenance these days, not to mention all the idling they see in yard service.

Greetings from Alberta

-an Articulate Malcontent

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Saturday, August 15, 2020 3:12 PM

Lithonia Operator
What is an OP?

Here, opposed-piston engine.  This has no cylinder head or valves; think of it as two conjugated inline engine blocks mounted together with their piston crowns facing each other, dished just enough to form a roughly lenticular combustion chamber at the point of nearest approach.  The blocks have scavenge ports reasonably near BDC, with one for air and the other for exhaust; when the opposed pistons are nearly at the bottom of their strokes (they are not phased 180 degrees opposite, but within about 15 degrees of being so) the charge air displaces the products of combustion, and fills the cylinder with clean air just as the pistons start back up and cut off the ports.  No valves, no valve train, all timing handled by very robust and strong spiral-bevel gearing between the two crankshafts.  (In most locomotive practice the generator is driven only from the lower crank, with the scavenge blower or supercharger driven from the upper one -- a vertical shaft conjugates the two for the remainder of power transfer.

It may have occurred to you by now that it would be nifty to do this with fork-and-blade V engines rather than mere inlines.  And lo and behold! welcome to the Napier Deltic, developed for torpedo boats, put in perhaps the greatest and most iconic of British locomotives, and at the heart of one of Tree's most favorite pieces of apparatus...

  • Member since
    November 2008
  • 1,881 posts
Posted by Leo_Ames on Saturday, August 15, 2020 3:07 PM

It stands for opposed piston, a type of diesel engine layout popularized by Fairbanks-Morse for US Navy submarines in the late 1930's (With the Fairbanks-Morse 38 8-1/8 diesel engine still a fixture in all but our Virginia class nuclear attack submarines as emergency generators, along with some of our surface fleet).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opposed-piston_engine

This family of engines from Fairbanks-Morse went on to make a brief splash in the North American railroading scene from the end of WWII through the early 1960's when the last locomotive order was finished in Wisconsin for Mexico.

Past rail and naval installations, they were a very popular choice in the latter days of the 1st generation of Canadian Seaway construction when Canada was enjoying a flurry of shipbuilding with the opening of the new St. Lawrence Seaway. As steam turbines fell out of favor in the mid 60's, Fairbanks-Morse OP's were often selected through about 1974 or so for Canadian ships.

And while I don't know much about Soviet locomotives, supposedly reverse engineered clones were commonplace.

  • Member since
    May 2019
  • 1,768 posts
Posted by MMLDelete on Saturday, August 15, 2020 2:03 PM

What is an OP?

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Saturday, August 15, 2020 1:02 PM

Flintlock76
Interestingly, I've never heard of any other FM OP engined unit having that problem.

They all did.  You're talking about locomotives with first-generation governors and unsophisticated pressure-charging, using mechanical injection in a two-stroke valveless design.  Then there are all the oil issues.  An OP in a locomotive is going to stink a lot of the time.

Mind you, this was a problem with EMD engines, too, just less discussed, and not as much exhaust mass flow per prime mover 'ahead' of the crew.  To my knowledge no one on an FM was actually asphyxiated by the exhaust, as one crew on an EMD consist was...

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