2104 one of a tiny order for only 20 units from Bombardier believed a compelled purchase to keep BBD in business. Nobody else ordered any! Soon, Bombardier closed the former MLW plant ending Alco production in North America.
Canadian National Railways
BBD HR616C
3000 HP full width carbody with Draper taper.
2100-2119 (20) Only order from any railway.
Note: 2117-2119 built with Hitachi traction motors.
2119 built with LRC style controls.
2100-2103 built 2/26, 2/26, 3/26, 3/26/1982
Retired 2/11/1983 sold back to Bombardier, Inc.
Units shopped, modified 3200 HP M6118-01 to -04 3/1983
and sent out as demonstrators 7001-7004 on CP Rail
Repurchased by CN 5/25/1984.
BDR 7002 ex CN 2101. CP Rail Toronto Yard. March 4, 1984 Bill Grandin
Note: QNS&L 214 behind.
Well that was acknowledged and implied by this " Soon, Bombardier closed the former MLW plant ending Alco production in North America."
Point taken however, so thanks.
I’m not even sure if the Bombardier HR616C qualifies entirely. I believe the builders plate on the LRC has Alco/MLW on it but not sure about the HR616C.
Well, there is always New South Wales State Rail Authority locomotive 8050 which was the last new Alco built in Australia, delivered March 1983 and still in service with Pacific National, the successor to the original operator.
Surely being the last built and still being in service counts for something…
M636C—Of course it does. At some point the last builders plate with Alco stamped on it happened. Ironically GE housed itself in the Montreal Locomotive Works sprawling complex but after they left it was tore down. I thought I read that Alcos ‘stuff’ was purchased by Fairbanks Morse of all things, so perhaps the ghosts of Alco are no longer residing at all with Bombardier in any way.
I’ll go along with Peter, especially since the Indian-built diesels were built under license. I’m not absolutely sure about this, but I believe that DLW is now a licensee for both Alco and EMD designs.
I checked the Fairbanks-Morse website out of curiosity a year or so ago, and if I remember correctly FM still produces the Alco 251 engine and the replacement parts for the same.
Correction, I did some checking. FM dropped the 251 engine in 2018, although they still offer a training course on it. I don’t know if they still stock parts, the website’s a bit vague on that.
Not only were the Indian locomotives built under licence, but for many years they were issued with Alco builder’s numbers.
This was certainly the case with the broad gauge DL-560 and the metre gauge DL-535 which were built for years with a single contract number for each type.
Most Alco spares have been sourced from India for some years now.
While EMD and more recently GE have entered the locomotive market in India, it will be some years before Alcos are replaced even in top main line duties.
The HR-series units were very similar to their M-line predecessors, and had most of the same problems. They were true ALCO/MLW units, through and through.
The CNRHA magazine (CN Lines) had a good article some years ago about the HR616 and the various modifications/fixes CN tried over their careers. I can’t find my copy right now, but I recall a quote from a CN mechanic who stated that they were just a M630 in a different body.
CN 2119 should have been preserved, being the last new North American ALCO/MLW unit, and also the first freight unit with a desktop control stand.
But locomotives built in North America are only part of the whole story…
There were more C636s built in Australia, with builders numbers in the Alco series than ever ran in North America. I think that is true for M636s also.
There were a number of Alcos built in Romania, and apart from those used locally, ten big passenger units with 16-251s rated at 4000 HP were sold to Greece and 20 with 12-251s rated at 3000HP were sold to Iran. There were French built Alco engined locomotives sold to Iraq. Most of these were built in the 1980s.
The number of units built in India might exceed the number of diesel units built in both Montreal and Schenectady.
Since Fairbanks Morse has been mentioned, the Russians built more locomotives with copies of the 38D8-1/8 than EMD built with the 567.
Is that intended as a serious question? Wait 'til I stop laughing…
About as much royalty, I expect, as Alco got for the Soviet copy of the 539s that were in the MRS1s for the Iran railway project. Remember the story in Trains about the locomotive in Cuba that was such a loyal copy that it included some of the Alco casting numbers in the block?
Meanwhile the Chinese supposedly have hundreds of 265H four-stroke 6000hp EMD motors running, supposedly with little problem, and Peter will know the provenance of the OP motors in the many members of the Dong Feng class up to DF4 … likely Russian designed, and likely 38D8 “related” at one step further in the ‘Chinese copy’ (I couldn’t resist) chain…
While we are on the subject of Communist engines – does anyone know the provenance of the 12V240ZJ or 16V280ZJA/B engine families (from about 1969 forward?)
Well why not one in each category… I believe we already have 2 of them.
My original posting did specify if this was the last Alco built in N America.
The MLW was a complete part of the Alco regime in North America and it’s where Alco retreated to after closing Schenectady.
So when was the last time the Alco name was on a builders plate?
Side note: I can access Classic on my phone but not on my iPad … I can get Trains on both, that never occurred before.
Late edit-- Things once again back to normal … for now anyway.
My original posting did specify if this was the last Alco built in N America.
No it didn’t - It referred to the cessation of work at Montreal but this wasn’t linked to the main question. There was nothing to connect the two to the casual reader, even if it was in the mind of the writer.
I don’t think Australian builder’s plates used the name “Alco” after 1969. Off the top of my head there was a reference to “MLW-Worthington”. But the word Alco was pressed into the 251 fuel pump covers on every engine I ever saw. But the plates always quoted the Alco series builder’s number.
To the question about Chinese 265H engines, I think even the Chinese realised that this engine was worse than the equivalent GE engine and after the intial 300 units of each type, many more ES59ACi units were built compared to the JT56C units. They did build some double ended ES59ACi units which might have been considered an advantage of the JT56C. I think at leas
