Why? Why is the ALCO DL-109 series nearly forgotten? They were built during WWII, to be used as freight & passenger locomotives. The New Haven(?), I believe did just that, running passenger trains by day, and freight trains by night, seemingly getting a lot of use out of them. Were they good locomotves?
See the “Ugly Locomotives” topic… [swg]
Seriously though, they seemed to be an “also-ran” type of locomotive; while New Haven was the big purchaser of the model, other railroads only placed token orders for them, usually a pair. Their styling wasn’t particularly well-refined, unlike the gracious-yet-powerful looks of their successor, the PA.
The 244 engine(s) were a nightmare. CRIP, ATSF and others put EMD 567’s in them after a while.
If I recall correctly, the DL-109’s used a pair of 1,000 HP 539 engines. The Pa’s were the ones stuck with the 244’s.
Another reason for the scarcity of the DL-109’s was the WPB banning the production of new passenger locomotives for the duration of WW2. By the time the war was over, Alco was ready to start with the PA’s. Now if WW2 hadn’t happened…
They were so darned UGLY that no one wants to remember them!!!
Dick
Texas Chief
… a few more railroads might have made the error of buying them.
RWM
The War Production Board relaxed the rules and passenger diesel production started up again in February 1945. The first E7s were built that month as was Santa Fe’s first passenger FT set the #167.
All DL105, DL107, DL108, DL109 and DL110s were built with twin six cylinder 539T engines. Only the original prototype DL103b was built with the twin six cylinder 538T engines. It has been said that the 539T was not suited for long periods of high rpm running like in a passenger engine. ALCO engine development lagged behind EMD’s. The failed 241 engine experiments and the rush to production of the 244 engine led to further ALCO problems.
I thought ALCO was given some leeway on that rule, by calling them dual service, passenger/freight locomotives.
I don’t know if I would call them ugly, like I would a BL2. I would call them unique, in a non-handsome sort of way.[:-^]
Good one… [bow]
At least the MILW put EMD-style noses on them in 1953. Out of service around 1959, scrapped 1964.
It looks like ALCO had to get War Production Board approval for 50 of the 60 New Haven DL109s, a GM&O DL109 and Southern’s DL109/DL110 cab booster set. ALCO was also producing the S-1, S-2, RS-1, and RSD-1 diesels during the war. A pair of DL203 Black Maria Cab units with the 12V-241 engines were built in early 1945, but did not see demonstrator service until after the war was over. The diesel locomotives were in addition to the several thousand steam locomotives built by ALCO and other manufacturing work for the war effort. All diesel data from The American Locomotive Company A Centennial Remembrance by Richard Steinbrenner.
Here is a Wikipedia article on the subject: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ALCO_DL-109 with links to other online sources.
I think it was a Beautiful Locomotive, so graceful in the age of steam.
Yes, The New Haven ordered there “Road Diesels” from there long time supplier, ALCO. They listed them as 0700 series “Freight-Passenger” locomotives. Each unit was rated at 2,000 hp and were run in pairs back to back. This gave them 4,000 hp at speeds up to 80 mph. They ordered 10 (5 pairs).
The first 4 units were delivered in December 1941, just after Pearl Harbor, and entered service on December 13th, south out of Boston, on train #175. A second order followed for 20 more units (total of 30, 15 pairs). 14 arrived in 1942, they then ordered 30 more. 2 more arrived in 1943, 10 in 1944, with the other thirty as the war ended. As of July 1944, total mileage for the 30 units then in service was 5,652,677 miles.
The New Haven entered the Post-War period with 30 4,000 hp pairs of DL109s (60 locomotives).
Ref: my copy of the New Haven Raiload company magazine "Along The Line", July 1944.
Of note, some of the “War Time” deliveries used Plywood for the side panels to save steel for the war effort.
If the industry seemed to like their ALCO 539 engined switchers, why wouldn’t they like a locomotive with 2 of them? Were the engines good, but the rest of the locomotive poor?
They did like them, as they drove to become the first “Class 1” railroad to eliminate steam, the next move was to order from ALCO a fleet of PAs for Passenger and FA/FB for Freight. The New Haven found that a four unit ALCO (FA-FB-FB-FA) would replace the L1 class 2-10-2 steam engines on the mountainous Maybrook line, they even eliminated the “helper service” at Hopewell Junction. By the mid 50s, steam was gone except for snow plow service, the New Haven was now playing with “Talgo Trains”, FM “C-Liners” and EMD FL-9s.
They didn’t see it comming, the Jet Airliner, the St. Lawence Seaway, and Interstate 95. They went bankrupt and were included in the Penn Central merger. Today Bullet Trains glide the former New Haven Main Line at 150 mph and Boston spends millions to re-lay and re-open abandon tracks for commuter service.
as was said above, the 539s were problematic in high rev passenger service. to this day, 539s have a reputation as a “bad” Prime mover.
Does that mean they were OK in slow freight and switching service?
The ‘539’ was a decent diesel engine for the late 30’s, until EMD developed the ‘567’ series engines. The power/weight ratio was in EMD’s favor, and for a passenger engine this was an advantage. Alco’s response to the E3 was the DL10x series of passenger engines, using a pair of the 538/539 series in-line switcher engines. They did not compare favorable to the EMD product in overall performance in passenger service.
Alco delivered DL109’s before the WPB ban in 1942(The WPB allowed existing orders to be filled). Alco’s production in WWII was made up of S1/S2 switchers and RSD1 road switchers for the Trans-Iranian Railroad for the most part. Alco/NH convinced the WPB to allow additional DL109’s for the NH as they were ‘dual service’.
EMD was busy building FT’s; they were not allowed to build E units or switchers by the WPB. As the war production effort wound down in late 1944, the WPB started to allow certain industries to field new designs. Also got permission to assemble the ABA ‘Black Maria’ set of testbed engines.
Jim
I just re-watched a tape I have, Trains Unlimited / Power and Speed / Diesel Locomotives. In it, there is a scant mention of the DL-109, saying something like: the railroads were not ready for the icreased maintenance needs of a large cylender diesel locomotive". (?) What does cylender size have to do with anything?
74 locomotives built between 1941 and 1945, 60 of them for just one “short haul” railroad, is just a “footnote” in railroad history.
Remember, Boston to New Haven, where the Diesel is swaped for an Electric, is only a 160 mile dash. What can fail in that distance. Buy the mid 1950s the New Haven was buying U25Bs, GP-9s, and FL-9s. After only 10 years the PAs and FAs were going, going, gone.
I must have strange taste, not only did I like the looks of the DL109s, but also the FM C-Liners (New Haven had 10).