Steam & Excursion > I was thinking about this...

First off, Anybody else wondered why D&SNG web site recently has been advertising for roundhouse mechanic with Alco diesel experience?

The bigger question. There were a number of diesels built for the military (MRS-1 and others like the RS4TC I think) that were said to be re-gauge-able for operation on foreign pikes.

I’m wondering aloud if any of those gauge-flexible units are available on the lease or sale market? Thoughts?

Posted from iPhone

Well....my first visit to the Colorado N.G was in 1962. If they replace steam with diesels, that will guarantee that I never set foot on the property again.

Keystone1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well....my first visit to the Colorado N.G was in
> 1962. If they replace steam with diesels, that
> will guarantee that I never set foot on the
> property again.


And what a loss that would be....could they survive it?

As for the "Alco mechanic" thing, doesn't the 1203 have a 6 cyl Alco motor in it?

Out

callum_out Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> As for the "Alco mechanic" thing, doesn't the 1203
> have a 6 cyl Alco motor in it?
>
> Out


Do you mean an "Alco engine"? The motors are usually mounted on the axles, i.e. the traction motors.

Yes, an engine, and yes the motors are the wound things between the wheels. Geez, you'd think
you worked for EMD or something!

Out

utwazoo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Keystone1 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Well....my first visit to the Colorado N.G was
> in
> > 1962. If they replace steam with diesels, that
> > will guarantee that I never set foot on the
> > property again.
>
>
> And what a loss that would be....could they
> survive it?

Should someone warn them of these possible non future visits?

HotWater Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> callum_out Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > As for the "Alco mechanic" thing, doesn't the
> 1203
> > have a 6 cyl Alco motor in it?
> >
> > Out
>
>
> Do you mean an "Alco engine"? The motors are
> usually mounted on the axles, i.e. the traction
> motors.

There are a number of posters that use motors and engines synonymously, which is confusing.

WP-M2051 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> HotWater Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > callum_out Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > As for the "Alco mechanic" thing, doesn't the
> > 1203
> > > have a 6 cyl Alco motor in it?
> > >
> > > Out
> >
> >
> > Do you mean an "Alco engine"? The motors are
> > usually mounted on the axles, i.e. the traction
> > motors.
>
> There are a number of posters that use motors and
> engines synonymously, which is confusing.

For what it's worth, I learned in High School Science class, back in the late 1950s, the technical difference between a "motor" and an "engine":

A) A "motor" transfers energy, i.e. electrical energy transferred into rotating motion, to do work. There is no fuel consumed in a motor.

B) An "engine" converts energy, i.e. a chemical explosion to power pistons, which then provides rotating motion, to do work. Thus, with an "engine" there is a consumption of some sort of fuel.


I always found it interesting/funny, during my last few years of employment, when one of the "new folks" on the railroad reported, "Trouble with the motor.", and an Electrician was dispatched to troubleshoot the "trouble". Upon arrival, the Electrician discovered the "new person" was actually referring to the prime mover diesel engine!

And yes, I know that in the automobile & racing culture the "motor" is what powers everything, however until VERY recently, automobiles and race cars do NOT have electric drive motors. It should be interesting when someone with a Tesla reports having "motor trouble", and a Mechanic starts looking under the hood to troubleshoot the gas guzzler.

It is heresy to many folks here on the steam board, but wonderful mountain railroad experiences are to be found around the world without steam locomotion. Having ridden parts of Switzerland, France, Canada, etc. on diesel and electric rail cars, I hope I can return for more, to ride new territories and to revisit some again.
Maybe the D&S will evolve into a blend of historic coal burning steam rides, diesel locomotive trains, and maybe diesel rail cars for off-peak or off-season trips, plus maybe some oil fired steam for a transition period. Something for everyone.
Diesel rail cars have air conditioning, modern toilets, and a better ride; I expect a lot of people would like those refinements.
As to diesel locomotives, hydraulic transmissions can be made to fit almost any track gauge and I believe that they can work as dynamic brakes; traction motor size doesn't have to be a constraint. The rack cars on Pike's Peak are diesel hydraulic.
Personally, coal smoke gives me asthma and I grew up in the diesel era so I'm not an advocate for coal except as a tangible historic link to RR and industrial history.
But others have different tastes, that is what makes life (including TO) interesting.
Comments?

This is what the Mount Washington Cog Railway did
...one trip with coal all others
with oil.

Posted from Android

Mike, I think you are right, however there is a much simpler solution to the problem at hand.

Convert the fleet to oil burning, and I know I am not the first one to mention this.

1. Looks and sounds the same.

2. No large sparks or cinders.

3. You can turn the smoke on and off when you want it.
G

ExSPCondr Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mike, I think you are right, however there is a
> much simpler solution to the problem at hand.
>
> Convert the fleet to oil burning, and I know I am
> not the first one to mention this.
>
> 1. Looks and sounds the same.
>
> 2. No large sparks or cinders.
>
> 3. You can turn the smoke on and off when you want
> it.
> G

Right except the passengers will no longer get cinders in their hair nor clothes. However, when the tubes are sanded out, wait until they get a load of THAT snot!

To Jack's comment, luckily the gons have roofs because the ruined clothes claims would be a bitch.
Motor on there big guy!

Out ``

Yes, convert to oil if not all the engines at one time!

Victor A. Baird
http://www.erstwhilepublications.com

callum_out Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> As for the "Alco mechanic" thing, doesn't the 1203
> have a 6 cyl Alco motor in it?
>
> Out

YES! The 1203 was re-engined with one of the power plants out of White Pass locomotives a few years ago. Just piecing things together online, the 1203 has not been working properly lately, which would explain the need for an ALCo mechanic.

I can only talk about Alco MRS-1 locomotives, which our railroad had back in the late 70s and early 80s. Yes they were theoretically reguaugeable (if that's a word) but only to the extent that the truck casting had extra holes to move the brake gear in and out for narrower or wider gauges setups. The truck castings were, of course, a bit wider, and would accept wheel sets up to 5' 6" wide, I seem to remember. They had 6 GE switcher traction motors... I don't remember the precise model of the traction motors - perhaps 752 - it was 40 years ago and I haven't worked on them in almost that long. The three we had were set up for standard US 4' 8-1/2" track gauge, had plain bearings, were equipped with Westinghouse Air Brakes and late-model Alco 244 prime movers. My mechanics said electrically, they were RS-3 locomotives with 6 smaller traction motors in lieu of 4 larger ones. When we go them from the military in the mid-70s, they had AAR type-E couplers, although there were brand-new European style buffers and turnbuckle-hook couplers, nicely protected by cosmoline, stored in the short hoods. Early on, we equipped them with Timken rotating-end cap roller bearings.

In reality, I am sure that wheel/axle/traction motor combos would have to be changed to reflect the different gauge. Perhaps, secreted away somewhere Defense Department depot, were meter gauge or broad gauge wheel/axle sets, ready to accept the GE switcher traction motors. Perhaps there were already built-up narrow or wide-gauge wheel/axle/traction motor combos ready to put under the locomotives before they were to be shipped to some European or South Asian theater. By the time we got the locomotives, our people who scoured the government surplus, couldn't any find additional "spare" traction motor for the units.

The only thing I really remember about the EMD MRS-1 versions, was they had hollow axles, apparently to save weight, and that, in later days when locomotives were coming up in surplus, precluded shipping them on their own wheels to other locations. This came after the FRA became concerned about hollow axles, after some incidents out in the "general rail system".

Anyway, they were good pullers, once the bugs were worked out, and the 6-wheel trucks weren't any worse on the track than 4 wheel trucks. After all, they were designed in the early 50s to operate in some pretty dicey track, perhaps in a new European war zone. As it turned out, the war came in Vietnam,but I don't believe any of this model locomotives were shipped over there. Folks I know who operated railroad equipment at the time for the Army, over there, talked about locomotives from a variety of countries, but not the USA.

G.F.Payne
B'more, MD