Worst American Diesel power ???

by far the RS-1 switcher has got to win the prize for ugliest. However, I read that they were very reliable in the real world. As far as the one I really don't want on my roster? I'd have to say the U36-B, never cared for those.

I'm not much of a fan of Baldwin diesel locomotives, and for the most part the railroads weren't either...

Jeff C

FM Trainmaster. Great concept, poor long term application for a locomotive. Very powerful, but totally impracticable impractical to maintain long-term. 

Gilly

(I love auto-correct spelling)

I heard an awful lot of grumping from the C&O crews about their GP30s. Claimed the lead truck (under cab) was always prone to excessive wheel slip and subsequent shut down.

Neil   

The early GE U-boats of the 1960's were not one of GE's better ideas. The higher horsepower units were especially unreliable.

There is a reason why there are still hundreds of SD40's running around (3,000 HP C-C trucks) while the only place you can find a U-30C (also 3,000 HP on C-C trucks) is in a museum or scrap yard.

What about centipede's? I heard they were a maintenance nightmare.

By far centapede locomotive brought by NELM,PENN and SAL railroads.I was told by a retired sal railroad employee.They were a nightmare for repairmen hard on the track.He then said"The e and the ft,gp locomotives got the job done."As a kid I saw 1 e unit but not up closse.We were crossing the tracks to pick up from cheerleading.By the looks of that locomotive I would not want work on its insides.

Anything GE up until the Dash 9!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!etc., etc.

Baldwin yard switchers were considered an OK investment, until BLH quit, and the parts started to dry up.  The 'Pedes were just the opposite by all accounts. Pennsy crews reported that it was nearly impossible to get a set up to Gallitzin with all four engines still afloat.  Used in snapper duty (pushing) the front truck would derail coming out of HSC's 9 degree curve. Replacing brakes meant ripping the power trucks apart. Fuel and air lines were done individually by specific shop personel, however they felt worked best on a given day.  Many smaller repairs would require the prime movers to be partially or fully removed from the carbody. Wiring was also inconsistantly run, and placed in areas where fuel and lube contamination was a sure thing. On the Penn, two units of this class were coupled with certain components shared between the two. If one failed, the other could be wiped along with it. PRR sent a pair back to Baldwin in 1951 to see if it could be "re-engineered"  Answer: a resounding NO !  The fix was worse than the disease!  These clunkers were condemned to pushing out of Philly in the late '50s, where they caused the least amount of headaches per mile. Here was a Diesel so bad they were considered more expensive to operate than steam helpers...and this is by the Penn, who absolutely hated steam from around '54 onward. If there's a bigger Diesel disaster, I've yet to hear about it!

Rich,

The reason there are no U Boats around is that I was in a meeting where our GM, by the name of Marion (Rick) Richardson told us in Marketing to "find a way to get them all back and gone". Someone performed an analysis that said we would never catch EMD in reliability, even with a new model, while there were U boats on each RR...it was mathematically impossible, even if our new deliveries were "perfect". (This guy was literally "something else...) So GE took three for one and even four for one as trade ins on Dash 7's. The fact that there was now a Penn-Central with most of the U boat fleet on the individual "pre P-C" railroads made our job easier. It was at this time that I managed to get a U25B NYC #2500 trade-in "hidden" until the local NRHS Chapter could buy it. One other U boat escaped, a NH unit, and that was it.

The Dash 7's were much better and designed for maintainability, but were still not the equal of an SD40, but we were much closer. We pulled ahead with the Dash 8 and the AC4400's solidified our market lead, and the new EVO's are even better.

I was in another meeting with "Rick" that he threw me out of when he pulled the attendees as to whether the looks of a locomotive were really important. I was the only one who raised my hand.......

Oops !  How could I forget the fabulous aluminum wired U50C  ???!  I'm sure all the Uncle Pete guys will have a bundle of tales about this gem.  I wonder if some of the other '60s weird-Os were as bad.....like the Alco DH643, and Alco C855. 

I have always liked EMDs and the crews I have talked to seem to like them, too. It speaks for itself when you see the market for the older EMD models and the rebuilding programs that focus on them. Look a NS today - there has to b a good reason they have scarfed up so many newer EMDs for their rebuilding programs but it is really interesting to study the ones hat never made it in the market and why. How the old line team engine builders flopped but a car builder and an appliance mfr. succeeded !! !

I was in a ship's engine room many moons ago that had four FM OP engines geared together. I can't imagine the mechanic's nightmare when working on one inside a locomotive shrouding.

I vote for the Centipedes.  Big locos on a good concept.  But they were just very disappointing in so many respects.

I have heard that GP-35's had a bad habit of exploding their primary traction motor wiring right off the motor. Also the Alco SP diesel hydraulics had a very short lifespan.

 And while not a diesel, the NH EP-5 electrics liked to catch fire and toast themselves.

Interesting because I've talked to several NS crews about this within the last week...Modern day on Norfolk Southern I hear more complaints about:

Ex Conail Dash 8 Wide Cabs (crews hate desktop control and noise!)

Ex Conrail SD60M/Is (see above)

SD60E rebuilds (loud and don't run worth a sh-t)

2700 series SD70M-2s... again, loud and will stall out if you look at them wrong. Crews HATE them!

EX UP SD9043MACs are earning a BAD reputation on the CNO&TP. A train started up Erlanger Hill with two of them on the point of the consist along with a Dash 9. By the time they got to the top all they had was the GE. These things can't be rebuilt fast enough. 

On the plus side the pride of the current NS fleet:

8000 series ES44ACs - most say they are near "dangerous" good at pulling a train and are quiet. Engineers love an 8000 in their consist - just ask!

1000 series SD70Aces - pull great but aren't near as "comfortable" as an 8000 GE

8889 and above Dash 9-40CW - as much as us NS fans get tired of seeing them, they're comfortable, still pull well (20 years later) and they know how to run them.

6600 series non rebuilt SD60 standard cabs - because they're predictable and like an old pair of gloves, just put them in on and work. a lot of the "old school" engineers said they could move more freight with three SD60 standard cabs even if they have to run long hood forward!

quote:Ex Conail Dash 8 Wide Cabs (crews hate desktop control and noise!)

Ex Conrail SD60M/Is (see above)

I have to disagree if you mean to say that the SD60I was noisey. Those "Whispercab" units were the quietest units I've ever run. That is with the windows closed.

Wasn't there that small matter about the EMD SD45's breaking their own crankshafts? My brother was extremely disappointed that the N&W 1776 was a cosmetic restoration only. He had run that unit. 

Gilly

Baldwin's attempt at high horsepower diesels was short lived. DR-6 and variants. Pennsy BP 20 of which there were 18 A units and 9 B units used in commuter service Long Island.  Would not MU with anything other than their sisters, quickly had mechanical problems.

Weaver model of the BP 20