Engineer Spike--
I have, of course, heard of "On Time," but I don't think I have read it, or that I have even seen a copy! (I think the GM-published book I described a few posts -- and years! -- back was titled "The Dilworth Story.") Could you look at your club's copy and report the date of publication and the named publisher? and author? I believe it was published by EMD itself. (Which I suppose means it should be taken with a grain of salt if it says that EMD was always the technological leader and produced the best product in the diesel locomotive industry!)
--
American railroads by the 1940s had -- at least on main lines -- bridges and track structure that could bear the heaviest loads of any rail system in the world: the size of late U.S. steam locomotives required this. But short lines, and branches on the big railroads, often had lower limits, so there was a market for light-axle-load locomotives: think of the GE 70-tonner, or the A1A-A1A road switchers that Also and Baldwin built. (I don't think EMD ever built domestic roadswitchers with idler axles, though they did build A1A-A1A roadswitchers for export to counties with more lightly built railways.). It does look as if the original goal in designing the BL series was to come up with something a bit lighter than later GP units or roadswitchers from the competition.
--
Since then, of course, American freight cars have gotten heavier. I think the current AAR limits for unrestricted interline service is something like 288,000 pounds on a 4-axle freight car (Ld Lim + Tare, if you read the data on the freight car side). Which is equivalent to the per-axle weight of a very heavy modern diesel! Which is why there is no market for a modern analogue of an RSC-2 or of an AS-416!
--
And thanks for continuing to contribute to an OLD string! I don't think the earlier discussion really reached conclusive answers to the questions raised.
I have, of course, heard of "On Time," but I don't think I have read it, or that I have even seen a copy! (I think the GM-published book I described a few posts -- and years! -- back was titled "The Dilworth Story.") Could you look at your club's copy and report the date of publication and the named publisher? and author? I believe it was published by EMD itself. (Which I suppose means it should be taken with a grain of salt if it says that EMD was always the technological leader and produced the best product in the diesel locomotive industry!)
--
American railroads by the 1940s had -- at least on main lines -- bridges and track structure that could bear the heaviest loads of any rail system in the world: the size of late U.S. steam locomotives required this. But short lines, and branches on the big railroads, often had lower limits, so there was a market for light-axle-load locomotives: think of the GE 70-tonner, or the A1A-A1A road switchers that Also and Baldwin built. (I don't think EMD ever built domestic roadswitchers with idler axles, though they did build A1A-A1A roadswitchers for export to counties with more lightly built railways.). It does look as if the original goal in designing the BL series was to come up with something a bit lighter than later GP units or roadswitchers from the competition.
--
Since then, of course, American freight cars have gotten heavier. I think the current AAR limits for unrestricted interline service is something like 288,000 pounds on a 4-axle freight car (Ld Lim + Tare, if you read the data on the freight car side). Which is equivalent to the per-axle weight of a very heavy modern diesel! Which is why there is no market for a modern analogue of an RSC-2 or of an AS-416!
--
And thanks for continuing to contribute to an OLD string! I don't think the earlier discussion really reached conclusive answers to the questions raised.
