• Alco RS3's, rebuilt and otherwise

  • Discussion of products from the American Locomotive Company. A web site with current Alco 251 information can be found here: Fairbanks-Morse/Alco 251.
Discussion of products from the American Locomotive Company. A web site with current Alco 251 information can be found here: Fairbanks-Morse/Alco 251.

Moderator: Alcoman

  by Alcoman
Otto Vondrak wrote:I'm going to move this thread into the Alco discussion, if that's okay with everyone...
Thats were it belongs............Thanks Otto.
  by SOU2645
There was also a lone 251 powered RS-3 on the L&N, and the C&NW had had a pair of wrecks rebuilt by Alco. These last three had RS-11 hoods.

L&N's unique RS20 kept its original hood. C&NW's pair had RS36 hoods and were not wreck rebuilds - they were done as a feasibility test to see whether repowering the rest of the RS3's would be worth it.

  by EDM5970
I hate to tell you this, SOU2645, but your information on the RS-3 251 repowerings is incorrect. All three units did have RS-11 hoods.

The L&N unit, 1350, was rebuilt with an RS-11 hood, per an L&N drawing that appears in George Elwood's excellent Fallen Flags site. Unfortunately there is no photo on that site, but I have seen one in a book on the L&N that one of my associates has in his collection. This same gentleman also has some Alco engineering drawings that pertain to this particular unit and it's new engine.

The C&NW units, 1613 and 1624, were wrecked in a derailment at New Ulm, NM in August, 1959. They were sent back to Alco for rebuilding with 251B engines, and received RS-11 hoods. This rebuilding took place sometime in 1960. The RS-36 wasn't even in production until February, 1962, so how could these units have RS-36 hoods?

The 1613 and 1624 are well documented in Eric Hirsimaki's book, The Alco Line, with photos both before and after the rebuilding; the before photos are of the wreck, in fact. A wreck repair hardly qualifies as a feasibility study.

  by RS-3
Actually L&N RS-3 1350 was NOT rebuilt with a RS-11 hood, but used its RS-3 hood. Photos of it are fairly common. There were some minor modifications made to the hood but overall it stayed intact.


  by EDM5970
OK, show me a photo of 1350 with an RS-3 hood-- The L&N equipment diagram, in Fallen Flags (sheet 50) clearly shows an RS-11 hood, complete with numberboard notches and compressor aftercooler. L&N's mechanical department drew up the diagram incorrectly?

(Added later)

A perusal of several of other drawings by the L&N mechanical department show their C-418s (RR class RS-27, which were really RS-11s) with the same long hood as 1350 received. Also the drawing of 1350 shows an RS-3 short hood with the RS-11 long hood. Clearly the mechanical department took the time to make a diagram specifically for this unit and to not use a "generic" RS-11 diagram for this rebuild.

Two people have said that this unit had a modified RS-3 long hood. Again, I'd like to see photos.
Last edited by EDM5970 on Sun Oct 22, 2006 10:39 am, edited 1 time in total.

  by Aji-tater
EDM, I reckon that CNW derailment you refer to actually was in MN (Minnesota) not in NM (New Mexico). Don't feel bad, my fingers transpose a lot too - that's the trouble with being a 2-fingered typist sometimes one is a bit faster than the other LOL.

  by EDM5970
Minnesota is correct. Can't count on the spell checker to get all the typos-

  by RS-3
I know nothing about the drawing, but I do know its wrong if it shows a RS-11 hood. I've seen it myself, I've shot it myself and I know (knew) the L&N Alcos pretty well. It had the hatch cover for the stack area raised 8-12 inches and I think a slightly larger radiator fan. Otherwise, pure RS-3. Drawings, apparently even "offical" drawings can be wrong. Show me a picture with a RS-11 long hood:-)

I'm sure there's a photo in the book
"The Louisville And Nashville In The Appalachians"


  by Alcoman
It sounds like the L&N rebuilt the RS-3u similar to the GB&W and D&H units.
Raised hood to accomadate the taller 251 engine.

  by N. Todd
L&N 1350:

As you can see, a vee 251 can fit in most engine hoods, save the turbocharger assembly. Interstingly, they left the oscillating headlights on. 1350 was also a RS-3 slug mother. Sold to Nap in 1979.

L&N's "C-418" series applied to RS-36s, not RS-11s. All of the locos in question were scrapped. As to those neat CNW RS-3/11 hybrids, they *probobly* don't exist, but I can't prove that.

  by EDM5970
I agree, now that I've seen two photos, that the L&N equipment diagram for 1350 is wrong. Maybe the RS-11 hood was wishful thinking on the Mechanical Department's' part? IIRC, GBW chose to raise the whole hood, as did M-K for the D&H and D&M units. Just raising the turbo housing, as L&N did, would have saved some serious money. In the case of the C&NW units, there was no hood left to raise, after the wreck!

As to RS-11 v. RS-36, the L&N diagrams do not give model numbers. DSG II, which is known to have a few errors of it's own, lists L&N 901-905 (exTC 301-305) as RS-36s. The same DSG II offers a photo of C&NW 1624 on page REP-450. I'm sure the C&NW units were scrapped long ago.

  by RS-3
The 5 ex-TC RS-36's were indeed RS-36's and classed by L&N as C-418's. They had the standard RS-36 carbody and were numbered 910-914 (NOT 901-905). No other units had the same hood modification as the 1350. (Another RS-3 was repowered with a EMD engine out of a E-unit, the 138 I think, but it required no real body modification.) The L&N later acquired the 10 ex-Seaboard/SCL RS-11's (L&N 950-959) when all the SCL "Falimy Lines" Alcos were sent to the L&N.


  by EDM5970
As Aji-tator pointed out, I'm good at typos-

  by RS-3
Ha! Join the club! ("Falimy" Lines???? Sheesh! If only my fingers listened to my brain.)