EMD Locomotives with Trade In Alco Trucks

[Engineer Spike]

There have been many EMD locomotives with AAR trucks from Alcos. I was wondering if the units had special center castings, or if the truck bolsters were modified.
How about the UBoats with Blomberg trucks on Seaboard, Maine Central, and Western Pacific?

[Allen Hazen]

Short answer is-- I don't know.
There was a lengthy discussion of traction motors on the GE, FM and ??Alco?? forums in Spring 2005. One relevant thing came out: the GE traction motor (752) is physically larger than the EMD motor, so Blomberg Trucks would have needed modification-- like, a new, narrower bolster-- to accommodate them. (EMD locomotives using Alco trucks typically re-used the GE motors as well, so this wouldn't have been an issue there.)
One small difference between the Blomberg and the Alco truck: EMD GP-35 with Blombergs seem to have been a half inch taller than those with Alco trucks: 14'5" vs. 14'4.5" (on the authority of drawings in "Mainline Modeler" for June and August 1990). I've never seen any reference to U-Boats with Blombergs being taller than normal, so perhaps the replacement bolsters were redesigned to a lower profile as well as to fit the big motors.
(But this is mostly speculation-- I don't have any documentation.)

[Allen Hazen]

Just looked for the earlier discussion of traction motors. None of it seems to have been on the GE forum (strange...): most is in a string called "PA-1 traction motor" on the Alco forum, with a bit in a string called "Erie-built traction motor" on the FM forum. One of the later postings to the string on the Alco forum described Blomberg and FA-1 trucks seen with no locomotive on top of them: apparently the center plate on the Alco truck was much smaller (the poster thought 16" to 18" diameter) than that on the Blomberg (22" to 24").

[EDM5970]

Please, there is no such thing as an AAR truck. What became known in railfan circles as the "AAR Type A" truck, used under switchers, is a drop side equalizer, rigid bolster truck. This truck design was first produced byCommonwealth, and later by General Steel Castings. It had become, by 1950, the accepted industry standard switcher truck, replacing the Baldwin Batz design and Alco's Blunt truck, as well as several others.

The AAR never called this truck, or the so-called "AAR Type B" (GSC swing bolster) truck an AAR design. What AAR did do was to persuade ALCO, during the late 1940s, to adopt this truck as standard for its switchers, calling the design an "AAR Recommended Practice". Starting in 1950, as ALCO was switching to the rigid bolster truck, and away from the Blunt, ALCO employees would note "AAR Trk" in their records as units were shipped. This was to denote that the newer, "AAR Recommended" trucks were under a particular unit.

The Type A and Type B nomencleture seems to have come from the railfan community, as neither ALCO records nor any AAR Manuals have the A or B designation in them. The above was extracted from page 97 of the late John F. Kirkland's "The Diesel Builders, Volume Two", published in 1989 by Interurban Press, Glendale, CA.

[RdHseRat]

EMD did not do anything to the trucks from the trade-in units. The male center-casting, on the new unit from EMD, was larger in diameter than the standard EMD casting. This made it impractical to convert them to Blomberg trucks later in life.

The savings by using the trade-in trucks was $5000 per unit. It looked good when the deal was signed, but the railroads paid through the nose for it in operating expense. When these units began operating behind SD40 and -2's, flat spots became a real problem. The only solution was to convert the 30's and 35's to composition shoes with a non-standard J-valve

Railroad mechanical men loved trading in units. They run the wheels off the trade-in units, or swap trucks to send "bad" wheels to EMD. However in this case, the d--- units came back with the same worn out wheels. Can still hear cries of anguish. Brand new units tied up because they had to wait for truck rebuilds.

[mxdata]

Indeed there was no mention whatsoever of the GSC swing bolster truck in the EMD District Manager's sales guide for GP30 trade-in transactions, and you will also find no mention of those trucks in Parts Catalog 190. There was no EMD parts support for the ALCO trucks, and it was as if the units that had them never existed.

[Allen Hazen]

Thanks for the (as expected from you!) very informative replies, EDM5970, RdHseRat, & mxdata! But, the punishment for knowledge is that you get asked MORE questions, so...
---
EDM5970: What SHOULD we call them? "Commonwealth Drop-Equalizer Two-motor Locomotive Truck" sounds about right, but it's a bit of a mouthful. For short I propose we call them (once we've acknowledged the historical inaccuracy) "Type B". Precedent: at least one textbook on vertebrate paleontology, after explaining cladistic nomenclature and pointing out that birds are by definition dinosaurs (so dinosaurs are not extinct after all) goes on to say that in the rest of the book, for short, "dinosaur" will be used as an abbreviation for "non-avian dinosaur."
---
RdHseRat: That is very interesting information.
(i) That $5000 discount: is that just for the trucks, or does that include a discount for the re-used traction motors? And, for comparison, what was the list price of a new GP-30 in 1962? (I'm guessing a bit over 100G, but that's only a guess.)
(ii) Just to make sure we're clear, are you saying that the center casting on the units using "Type B" trucks was larger than that on standard units? I would have expected from the description given by (I forget who) in the PA-1 TM string that it would have been SMALLER than standard diameter.
---
mxdata-- So, EMD was willing to re-use trucks if the customer asked for it, but didn't want its sales people SUGGESTING it. What were they-- in the business to make money or something! (Grin!)

[Typewriters]

Al Staufer's book on the Pennsy, "Pennsy Power II" gives a price of $206,572 in 1963 for the GP-30. This probably includes trainphone equipment and cab signals -- he says directly that this was what PRR paid for them.

On the drive for proper nomenclature, one of my lifelong 'things' -- Wunderbar! Kirkland said it best in his book on Baldwin diesels when he suggested 'taking the time to come into possession of the facts.'

-Will Davis

[H.F.Malone]

Well, let's muddy the waters a bit more here.....

The GE parts catalogs covering the U25 era units make reference to TWO different centerplate diameters on the GSC road truck (see, I avoided calling it an "AAR type B"!!!). This was based on what trucks came off a given trade-in unit, according to the parts book. It was quite common for Alco FAs, RS-2s, etc to be traded in for those early U-boats, and I supect that there were differences in the 1945-1950 Alco-GE centerplates. The GE parts book listed a centerplate adapter/filler piece, so that one standard size of male center casting on the GE U-boat underframe was used. I seem to recall the truck centerplate bowl as being either 18" dia or 21" dia. It would also be relatively easy to exchange truck bolster castings, which had the centerplate bowl cast in them.

Browsing the old parts catalogs can be enlightening, and it can also raise questions that probably can never be answered.

[EDM5970]

Well, we could call the switcher trucks rigid bolster trucks, and the road unit trucks swing bolster trucks. Or, how about just switcher and road trucks?

The use of the Type A and Type B nomenclature is so widespread that the small number of people that read this thread will not make a difference anyway. And one of my personal favorite units, the RS-1, wasn't called that by the builder at first, either.

I believe it was I that contributed some centerplate dimensions to the PA thread. I'm not going to look now, but IIRC the EMD Blomberg had a larger diameter centerplate than the GSC truck used on the FAs and RS's. To my way of thinking, a thinner bolster, as on an Alco or GE, makes room for the 752 TMs, which are a few inches longer, between axle and bolster, than the EMD motors. (If I remember, and have time, I'll refresh my memory by using a tape measure Saturday; I have access to 752s, D-??s, Blombergs and GSC road trucks).

So, to continue Allen's line of thought on punishment, I'll ask another question: How do you get 752s in a Blomberg truck? With a thin bolster, and a centerplate to match the locomotive that will sit on top of the truck?
This may also have something to do with the GE U-boat parts question that Mr. Malone raises. Perhaps GE was anticipating some Blomberg truck trade ins, which they did eventually get from WP, Auto-train, CSX and several others.

I also don't understand RdHseRat' s comment on comp. shoes and J-whatever relay valves on 30s and 35s. CI and comp. shoes have to use different relay valves anyway. As far as bad wheels, I'm sure that if a RR mechanical department requested new wheels, and that the trade in trucks and TMs be gone over, they would have gotten them returned good as new, although at a cost. You gets what you pays for.

[Allen Hazen]

H.F. Malone: Thanks! (If you have the parts catalogue and want to trade or scan or... There has been a lot of discussion on the Yahoo "GE Locos" forum
http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/gelocos/
recently about who has what GE manuals (etc): both for historical interest and for people involved in trying to restore preserved locomtives.) ... How did the catalogue refer to the truck, b.t.w.?
----
Unfortunately, I'm not confident that calling them "GSC road trucks" will end the nomenclatural problem. GSC (it stands for "General Steel Castings," doesn't it?) was the company that produced the frame castings. The produced castings for many different truck designs... including, I think, some EMD Blombergs. (Me, I'd like to use grand old names like "Eohippus" and "Brontosaurus," even if "Hyracotherium" and "Apatosaurus" are technically preferable... but that's just me. Grin!)
---
It may be bad Net-iquette, but I just made a nothing post to the "PA-1 traction motors" string on the Railroad.net Alco forum to bring it back to the first index page. And yes, it was you, EDM5970, whose post there I was referring to. (One of you many interesting observations!)
--
Will Davis: thanks for the GP-30 sticker price! (Somewhere, on some rail history FAQ, there ***ought*** to be a graph, or maybe just some sample prices, to show how locomotive prices have gone up over the decades! I'll try to hunt up what data points I can find in my office to pass on.)

[jr]

Allen,

Regarding new locomotive pricing, a Mechanical Engineer who worked for NYC / PC / Conrail (starting approx 1946), once told me that they had a rule-of-thumb of about $100 per horsepower for diesels.

Over the last ten years or so, whenever I've happpened to see a historical locomotive purchase price published, I applied this rule, and it correlates remarkably well, across different makes and models, from the 1940s, into the 1960s.

I don't really know when the price diverged from this algorithm. If it were still in effect, today's 4400 hp models would be $440,000, and I know that they are closer to ten times that price.

JR

[EDM5970]

"Alco/GE Road Trucks" won't work as BLW and Lima used them too, although bigger yet to accept the Westinghouse motors. As I alluded to before, we may be stuck with the common usage, incorrect as it is.

X22, years ago, mentioned RS-1s going for around $80,000 new in the late 1940s, so they must have been a bargain. I remember being shocked when I heard that new commuter units for NJ Transit were a million each some years ago. Times have changed.

[A&MWatcher]

I would have to ask, if there was no AAR truck then why in my DL-440 MI under Design Data they state Class-AAR designation B-B?

The early bird may get the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese!

[EDM5970]

A&M- The Class-AAR designation B-B refers to the wheel arrangement of the locomotive; i.e. a locomotive with two trucks, each having two powered axles. Geeps, Switchers, anything (almost) four axle would be good examples.

A C-C locomotive has two trucks with three powered axles in each truck. EMD SD units, Alco RSD units are typical C-Cs.

An A-1-A A-1-A unit has two six axle trucks, but only the leading and trailing axle of each truck is powered. EMD E units and Alco PAs and DL-109s carry this designation. Alco RSC units and some Baldwins, like the DRS-6-4-1500 also have this wheel arrangement, for use on light track.

For use on good heavy track, the Centennials that EMD built for the UP are D-D units.

Same alphabet, but with an entirely different meaning-