Are there any BL2’s in regular service? I know that there is one in tourist duty in the East.
I have heard that there is a Western Maryland one
in service somewhere in the east;exactly where,I’m
not sure. But I do know that the Kentucky Railway
Museum at New Haven,Ky. has Monon # 32,and is
in service for excursion runs. Their web: www.kyrails.org
BL2s have to be, in my opinion anyway, one of the ugliest loco EMD ever made. [B)] Not as ugly as the pug nosed GE units but still ugly. [:0] [:0]
I once opined that the BL2 was “EMD’s mistake” for several reasons. It borders on being ugly, but the engineering is pretty awful, too. It was an intermediate step between carbody-type units and hood units, and the frame design shows it. The sides have a small bridge-type truss to carry the load, which makes access to the engine and main generator difficult at best. It was also expensive to build.
That being said, it is an interesting transition between F’s and GP’s.
I grew up thinking that the BL2s were your basic diesel locomotive, because that’s basically all I saw until I was about 10. C&O used them on our branch line (duh!) for both passenger and freight service.
I also remember going into the cab of Monon 32 at an EMD open house. Talk about cramped interiors! And the C&O units could only have been worse, because some of them were equipped with dual control stands!
The only BL2 units around that I am aware of are at the National Raiway Museum in Green Bay, Wisconsin and they (I believe) have two, and I believe the railroad museum in St. Louis may have one.
The two in Green Bay that eolafan mentions are the former Private locomotives that were owned by Glen Monhart(I might have spelled that wrong). He also owned the Janesville and Southeastern F unit set also at the museum up there. Both the BL2s and the F’s were stored in Janesville WI, on the Wisconsin and Calumet and the Wisconsin and Southern for a while before going to Green Bay.
Noah
I seem to recall reading a comment from an EMD official that the BL2 was supposed to be ugly. If true, they succeeded! But you have to admit that it has it’s own unique charm…
The comment in question was made by *** Dilworth and he was referring to the GP7, in which he wanted a locomotive that would be so ugly that it would be kept out on the lines away from headquarters, where it could do real work.
Didn’t Mr. Monhart own an E-unit painted in ACL’s gag-a-maggot purple? Does anyone know what happened to that locomotive?
The West Virginia Central runs a BL2 out of Elkins, WV. It was, I believe, a Western Maryland unit.
[quote]
QUOTE: Originally posted by Mark_W._Hemphill
Dilworth’s comment about “ugly GP7s” strikes me as way too clever to be taken at face value. Recall that the GP7 didn’t appear until several years after Alco had begun marketing a roadswitcher. The roadswitcher in all respects was a more functional design than the carbody diesel: easier to maintain, easier to switch with, more versatile, easier to climb on and off. This was obvious. Also obvious was that EMD could have built a GP3 if it wanted, but it didn’t, even though the engineering changes from the F3 were not complicated or difficult.
So why not? I think it had to do with EMD wanting to protect its high profit margins, and if one looks at the corporate history, one sees that GM management wanted to reap a lot of rewards after patiently spending a very large sum over 15 years to develop and perfect its diesel-electric locomotive. GM management replaced the innovators that had built EMD with production men, which speaks volumes about what it wanted EMD to do: stop developing new products and run a factory that made lots of money.
Any time one sees a big, powerful, cash-rich company decline to field a head-to-head competitor against a small, weak, impecunious competitor, one immediately suspects that the big company wants to protect the profit margin on its existing products. Moreover, EMD felt that its product was so superior to the A
I mean taking over from EMD’s lead . . .
[swg]
As long as GE stands for “Grossly Engineered” and EMD “Easily Maintained Diesel” EMD wins hands down no matter the looks ( control stand is much better than desktop controls )
I strongly disagree about lack of innovation at EMD after the initial dieselization. I worked for EMD the summer of 1952. EMD’s management recognized that they had to innovate to survive. There were the competitive builders, improvements would mean new business as railroads could buy new power for unit reduction, easier maintenance, and greater fuel economy. Alco simply saw the advantages of a road switcher before EMD. In this respect, EMD was simply following conventional railroad thinking, which had designed different locomotives for freight, passenger, and switcher service. When Alco built a diesel, they were more attentive to minority customers needs, and the RS-1 went to railroads who wanted a road-switcher but could not get EMD to build what was first a low-production model (relatively). Dillworth was still the great innovator and he was on board even past retirement as a consultant until he passed on. The only interference I remember by top GM management was prevention of EMD’s entering the straight electric market, and this prohibition was reversed some time after 1952.
GE wasn’t a thread until 1959 or so with the U25B
Honestly I don’t really know. If he did though I’d like to see that.
Noah
Yeah, and the U25B was UGLY also. [:0] [:0] [:0]
After Glenn Monhart’s death, his collection of diesels was auctioned off. The E-3 #501 was purchased by the North Carolina DOT Rail Division in 1998, and is on long-term loan to the Spencer, N.C. Museum. HTH[8D]
kfuztv,
In response to your original question, there is a BL2 on a tourist railroad based in Lackawaxen, PA. I don’t know the current status of the unit as the line was having difficulties last I heard. I have seen it in the past. The BL2 is one of those things that are really weird to look at but kinda cool when you see one in person. I guess “unique” applies to the model.