Railroad Forums 

  • Early 567D engines

  • Discussion of Electro-Motive locomotive products and technology, past and present. Official web site can be found here: http://www.emdiesels.com/.
Discussion of Electro-Motive locomotive products and technology, past and present. Official web site can be found here: http://www.emdiesels.com/.

Moderator: GOLDEN-ARM

 #1463381  by SSW921
 
This data is from the EMD Locomotive Reference Data dated January 1, 1959. There are two listings on page 1 of the EMD Data for the 567D engine. The first listing is GP9 (Mod) 2000 HP 16-567D (Mod) Rd-Switcher. There is a note beside this type of GP9 which at the bottom of the page states GP9 Converted. We now call this type of unit an Omaha GP20. Don Strack covers the Union Pacific's turbocharged GP9 program here http://utahrails.net/articles/up-gp9-turbo.php" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The second listing on page 1 is for the SD24 2400 HP 16-567D Freight or Passenger. This was at the time when only the demonstrator SD24 #5579 existed, but orders from Santa Fe and Burlington may have been on the books. The first production SD24s were delivered in May 1959.

Ed in Kentucky
 #1463984  by Engineer Spike
 
This opens up some questions. First, were there any roots blown D blocks before the turbo versions? Did UP just turbo the GP9s with their original C blocks, or did they reinforce them somehow? Did EMD participate with the Omaha GP20 program, as an experiment toward further development?
 #1464270  by SSW921
 
Engineer Spike wrote:This opens up some questions. First, were there any roots blown D blocks before the turbo versions? Did UP just turbo the GP9s with their original C blocks, or did they reinforce them somehow? Did EMD participate with the Omaha GP20 program, as an experiment toward further development?
Read through the linked Don Strack Omaha GP20 article. It would appear that the 567C block was retained in all cases and the turbocharging was added. Strack doesn't state that, but he doesn't state anything else about the type of block either. The UP did send in three of its 300 class GP9s to EMD in early 1959, so some discussion would have preceeded that. And by doing so EMD would be paying research cost on turbocharging the 567C for use in a Geep.

I haven't read anything about a non turbo 567D prior to the Norfolk & Western GP18s produced in December 1959. The date of the production suggests that the non turbocharged version of the 567D was more than a thought in mid 1959. And to dovetail on that how many GP9 orders were switched to GP18s or GP20s?

Ed in Kentucky
 #1464311  by Pneudyne
 
The EMD literature associated with the release of the 567D engine and the associated model range creates the impression that all of the original 567D variants were developed as part of a homologous series, and released at about the same time.

Here are some excerpts:
EMD Giant Stride p.01.jpg
EMD Giant Stride p.02,03.jpg
EMD Giant Stride p.08,09.jpg

Cheers,
 #1464362  by SSW921
 
This is from the October 1958 issue of Trains magazine Arrivals & Departures column on page 12. "Be on the lookout for Electro-Motive six-motor C-C road-switcher demonstrator No. 5579. unit resembles SD9 but is designated SD24, includes a turbo V-16 diesel rated at 2400 h.p., will be testing on Missabe Road. SD24 would invade the super-unit field previously dominated by FM's Train Master and Alco's DL-600." Does that sound like David Morgan prose?

Ed in Kentucky
 #1464563  by SSW921
 
Engineer Spike wrote:This opens up some questions. First, were there any roots blown D blocks before the turbo versions? Did UP just turbo the GP9s with their original C blocks, or did they reinforce them somehow? Did EMD participate with the Omaha GP20 program, as an experiment toward further development?
You are right about the reinforcement of the 567D engines. I've found mention of it, but no specific details yet. And the 567C to 567D develoopment is still a question.
 #1464565  by SSW921
 
I've been reading through the old Trains Magazines of the era when the 567D was being developed. The first EMD turbocharged 567 was the LaGrange assembly plant peaker unit at LaGrange installed in January 1958. The 10th Annual Motive Power Survey was in the May 1958 issue. Editor David Morgan writes about the rebuilding programs that EMD is doing. The rebuilding was basically turning old F units into GP9s. And all the units that Norfolk & Western was buying to dieselize. Many of the EMD advertisements of the time featured railroad president testimonials for dieselization. Editor Morgan is silent about any turbocharging of EMD's 567 diesel.

Ed in Kentucky
 #1465034  by SSW921
 
The February 1959 Trains magazine Arrivals and Departures column has this news item, La Grange Catalog: Electro Motive has formally announced its new six-motor 2400 h. p. hood unit, the SD24. It resembles an SD9, incorporates a turbocharged V-16 diesel engine, can be ballasted to 195 tons. Burlington is buying 16.

Ed in Kentucky
 #1465373  by SSW921
 
The May 1959 issue of Trains magazine has the 11th Annual Motive Power Survey written by David Morgan. "How many horses under the hood?" starts on page 22. There is a photo of the SD24 demonstrator #5579. Morgan writes about a speed war in railroading and railroads must cut transit time for freight trains. On page 25 it is noted that Union Pacific has signed up for 75 SD24s shortly after New Years Day.

Ed in Kentucky
 #1465530  by mp15ac
 
An interesting detail about SD24 Demonstrator 5579 is that it was built using the lower cab and base like the SD7 and SD9 (except phase 4). All of the production SD24 used the higher cab and base like the Phase 4 SD9 and SD18.

Stuart
 #1465752  by SSW921
 
The June 1959 Arrivals & Departures column of Trains magazine has this: "SOUPED-UP GP9s. Union Pacific has equipped 25 EMD GP9 road-switchers with AiResearch turbochargers, hiked unit horsepower from 1750 to 2000 plus. Revamped diesels are said to put out more power at high altitude; reduce fuel costs; and emit smoke free exhaust."

Ed in Kentucky
 #1466377  by SSW921
 
The August 1959 issue of Trains has a paragraph, "Larger Lungs for a Great Warhorse" that details the 567D1, 567D2 and 567D3 engines. And below that also on page 12 is "A New Catalog from EMD" where the new RS1325, GP18, SD19, GP20 and SD24 are described. Yes SD19, I've never seen that written anywhere else.

Ed in Kentucky
Pneudyne wrote:The EMD literature associated with the release of the 567D engine and the associated model range creates the impression that all of the original 567D variants were developed as part of a homologous series, and released at about the same time.
 #1470266  by SSW921
 
The September 1959 issue of Trains had four pages dedicated to showing the then new 567D equipped units. Page 7 had a Santa Fe advertisement touting 69 new 2400 horsepower diesels, 45 were SD24 and 24 RSD-15s. Page 8 had a photo of four CB&Q SD24s. Page 13 had an EMD advertisement for the GP20, GP18, SD24, SD18 and RS1325. And page 32 had a Norfolk and Western roster that showed 24 GP18s that were on order. It would appear that Trains was giving EMD some free publicity on the new 567D line of diesels.

Ed in Kentucky
 #1500608  by SSW921
 
Has anyone seen anything on the F18 or F20 that EMD did preliminary design work on? See Classic Trains Spring 2015 page 35.

Ed in Kentucky
 #1500685  by Allen Hazen
 
The New Haven got 60 "FL-9" units in two orders of 30 each. My recollection -- I haven't checked before posting as I ought -- is that the units of the second order were rated at 1800 hp. Since it was a small order for a specialized design, EMD might have been reluctant to go to the trouble of introducing another model designation(*), but I've sometimes wondered whether they should have been "FL-18."
--
(*) I think EMD initially hoped to sell the 3rd-rail capable FL-9 to the Long Island and or the New York Central as well as to the New Haven. I have no idea of how extensive an effort they made, or of the dates if they made some serious efforts. Since model designations were partly up to the sales department (cf. the F-5 story), this might be connected to why the later FL-9 weren't redesigned...