Favorite Lesser-Known engines?

[ConstanceR46]

I'll go first; the Henschel HG16 may have belonged to a questionably-moral company, but they were one hell of an absolute unit.

[mtuandrew]

The first one.* Unquestionably my favorite.

*at least, the direct predecessor of all American-pattern diesel-electrics

[CarterB]

BL2 not successful, but great looking!!
http://www.railpictures.net/images/d2/0 ... 913381.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Allen Hazen]

O.k., I'll admit to having a long-standing affection for the first GE hood units: the switchers (with I-R engines) built for the Bush Terminal Railroad in Brooklyn, NYC. I think a few were still in use when I became seriously interested in railroads, and to my regret I did not go to Brooklyn to look at them! And, to my regret and I think to the shame of the American railfan community, none were preserved.
--
ConstanceR46-- I looked up the HG16 when you first posted, and it looked as if it was pretty much a standard EMD G16, an export model used in a number of countries. What (other than assembly by a German licensee rather than by LaGrange or London Ontario) is different between the HG16 and a standard G16 that makes you particularly fond of it?

[ConstanceR46]

-The cab is Asymmetrical and a unique aspect of the HG16s, the shape not being reused on any other GMD or Henschel diesel.

-The HG16 stands slightly taller than the G16 guesstimating pictures of G16s from Vale (A Brazilian ore company) and HG16s.

- HG16 radiators are moved from the short hood to the long hood, giving the rear a unique design compared to G16s.

They also stand out as a "dead-end" in the world of exports; the HG16 was only built for LAMCO and never developed into anything, really.

[Allen Hazen]

ConstanceR46--
Thanks for the reply! Over on the "EMD" forum of Railroad.net, in the string on EMD export locomotives, Pneudyne has posted (noting your post here as inspiration) scans of some railroad trade press articles on the G-16 and HG-16 from when they were new.

The HG-16 was designed for drag service, and was MUCH heavier than the usual G-16. (Leading to the question: does the "H" stand, as I assumed, for "Henschel," or for... heavy? (Grin!)). So perhaps the reason it wasn't built in greater numbers was that customers wanting a locomotive of that weight for that kind of service just bought domestic (North American) style locomotives instead.

(I think, b.t.w., that radiator fans were on the rear of the long hood in G-16 as well: I believe that the cooling fans mounted on the short hood of some G-16 were for the dynamic brakes.)

Thanks for posting about this! The HG-16 is an interesting locomotive that I had not known anything about!

[John_Perkowski]

The EMD E-2

Here she is

[D Alex]

How about Fairbanks-Morse, with their opposed-piston diesels? https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... Master.JPG" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[litz]

There aren't many of them (and probably even fewer survive today), but years ago, the GTW rebuilt 36 GP9s with essentially GP38 systems (mechanical and electrical). They got new brakes, new cabs ... essentially becoming brand new locomotives in the process. Calling them GP9Rs, these became road numbers 4630-3635 (I think).

A few years ago the Blue Ridge Scenic RR acquired one of these. Fantastic engine ... ran well, and could pull uphill better than a billy goat.

[Allen Hazen]

John Perkowski--
The E-2 was definitely a standout. EMC, despite its later reputation for standardizing, was willing to customize for a good customer: in this case, replacing its standard nose design with something more bulbous in order to fit in with the "branding" of earlier UP streamliners.
As you probably recall, I'm intrigued by electrical system minutiae. EMC started making its own generators and traction motors (the traction motors at least being direct copies of the GE model they had been using) in the E-3 period: E/E-1/E-2 were all built with other manufacturers' electrical gear. (The EA/EB for B&O had Westinghouse, the E-1 for Santa Fe had GE.). Do you recall offhand what the electrical were on the E-2?

[John_Perkowski]

As it happens, a few years back I won a copy of the UP Research and Mechanical Standards books on the stramliners from 1943.

LA 1-2-3 used GE-GT-544-BI Generators
SF 1-2-3 used Westinghouse WEST 486 Generators
Both were rated at 600V DC

LA 1-2-3 used GE #716-E-2 traction motors at a 25/52 gear ratio.
SF 1-2-3 used Westinghouse #366-E traction motors at a 24/52 gear ratio.

My source is UP Diagram S-55, drawn 12-16-37, Issue C, 2/15/43.

[Allen Hazen]

John Perkowski--
Thanks!
Seems like a clear indication that UP management was still thinking of diesels as experimental: don't try for standardization yet, but try out different variants!
And I think the GE 716 traction motor is what EMC copied when they started making their own electrical gear. It was used on a number of mid-1930s EMC locomotives.

[tj48]

I always found these chunky little beasts interesting
http://www.cnrphotos.com/gallery2/main. ... emId=45576" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[John_Perkowski]

Seems like a clear indication that UP management was still thinking of diesels as experimental: don't try for standardization yet, but try out different variants!

The EMC/Winton 201 was a developmental engine. The arrival of the 567 was the true beginning of the Diesel as a standard locomotive. After all, it had a fifty plus year run in service as an engine. (And I’m not sure if it still doesn’t live on some Class 1s)

[Allen Hazen]

tj48--
There is something about the RSC-24!
Interesting case of a major railroad and a major locomotive builder doing something utterly non-standard. Built for (now abandoned, I think) lines on Prince Edward Island (?) which were too lightly built for standard North American diesels: the sort of application that, a few years earlier, might have gotten GE 70-tonners, or a North American order for an export model... But CN was getting four FPA-2 and FPB-2 units re-built with 12-251 engines (making them virtually equivalent to the contemporaneous FPA-4 and FPB-4).(*). And MLW used the left-over 12-244 engines as the basis for these light-weight road switchers.
---
Many years ago, "Trains" magazine had an occasional humorous page, with cartoon captions on railroad photos. One photo was of an engineer looking glumly out the cab window of an RSC-24, muttering "If I've told them once, I've told them a thousand times: you wash C-628s with a mild detergent, using a cold rinse."
---
(*) Fresh in my mind, since I've recently asked questions about the FPA-4 (and related units) on the "Alco" forum.