by Allen Hazen
This is a question about a particular type of diesel-electric locomotive, but could have been posted to any of three forums: F-M, EMD or GE. So... General discussion!
---
Suppose it is the late 1950s (mid to late: no earlier than 1954 for the EMD engine in question). You run a railroad which has a small (they all were) but significant to you fleet of F-M/GE "Erie-built" locomotives. They spend altogether too much time in the shops and not enough on the road, but are too new (and, when working just right, pull too well) for scrapping. So, you decide you would like to re-engine them, using EMD 16-567C engines in place of the original, troublesome, 10-cylinder F-M opposed cylinder engines.
(To interject a bit of fact into the speculation, the KCS actually did have its Erie-builts re-engined with 567C engines...)
Your opposite number at the Kansas City Southern has the same idea, and will send to units to La Grange to have the EMD engines installed at the factory, but you wonder if you could save money by having the work done at your own diesel shops...
(i) Theoretically, the locomotives will be less powerful with the EMD engine, but this may be largely theoretical: the Erie-built is always described as a "2000 hp" unit, but (depending on atmospheric conditions) it could deliver less: the New York Central (whose diagram-book page on the type is available at the "Fallen Flags" rail image site) rated them at 1800 hp.
(ii) Given the similarity of power rating, and the similar top speed of the F-M and EMD engines, I would assume the original GE 567 main generator could be used with the new engine, and the (locomotive, as opposed to engine) control system might not require much change...
QUESTION: is this right?
(iii) The Erie-built had very large radiators (with lots of water capacity) to allow quite low engine operating temperature. (Their F-M engine was based on one used in U.S. Navy submarines and destroyer escorts, and, as an old "Trains" article on the type put it, the parameters of their engine installation "presupposed an ocean of cooling water.")
QUESTION: With the EMD engine, would you want to modify the cooling system so the engine will run ... hotter?
(iv) It's too much to expect that EMD and F-M had identical engine-generator interfaces. (QUESTION?) So I suppose a new engine/generator coupling will need to be fabricated. Obviously (cf. earlier reference to KCS) EMD's engineering and workshop staff and equipment can handle this task, but
QUESTION: is this something the mechanical department and backshops of a typical 1950s Class 1 raIlroad could do in house?
---
Suppose it is the late 1950s (mid to late: no earlier than 1954 for the EMD engine in question). You run a railroad which has a small (they all were) but significant to you fleet of F-M/GE "Erie-built" locomotives. They spend altogether too much time in the shops and not enough on the road, but are too new (and, when working just right, pull too well) for scrapping. So, you decide you would like to re-engine them, using EMD 16-567C engines in place of the original, troublesome, 10-cylinder F-M opposed cylinder engines.
(To interject a bit of fact into the speculation, the KCS actually did have its Erie-builts re-engined with 567C engines...)
Your opposite number at the Kansas City Southern has the same idea, and will send to units to La Grange to have the EMD engines installed at the factory, but you wonder if you could save money by having the work done at your own diesel shops...
(i) Theoretically, the locomotives will be less powerful with the EMD engine, but this may be largely theoretical: the Erie-built is always described as a "2000 hp" unit, but (depending on atmospheric conditions) it could deliver less: the New York Central (whose diagram-book page on the type is available at the "Fallen Flags" rail image site) rated them at 1800 hp.
(ii) Given the similarity of power rating, and the similar top speed of the F-M and EMD engines, I would assume the original GE 567 main generator could be used with the new engine, and the (locomotive, as opposed to engine) control system might not require much change...
QUESTION: is this right?
(iii) The Erie-built had very large radiators (with lots of water capacity) to allow quite low engine operating temperature. (Their F-M engine was based on one used in U.S. Navy submarines and destroyer escorts, and, as an old "Trains" article on the type put it, the parameters of their engine installation "presupposed an ocean of cooling water.")
QUESTION: With the EMD engine, would you want to modify the cooling system so the engine will run ... hotter?
(iv) It's too much to expect that EMD and F-M had identical engine-generator interfaces. (QUESTION?) So I suppose a new engine/generator coupling will need to be fabricated. Obviously (cf. earlier reference to KCS) EMD's engineering and workshop staff and equipment can handle this task, but
QUESTION: is this something the mechanical department and backshops of a typical 1950s Class 1 raIlroad could do in house?