The freelanced belt railroad on my layout has an all-Alco roster as a hommage to my grandfather whom worked at Alco for many years. The period for the layout is modern and this would logically lead me to a roster of mostly Century-series engines but I have an affinity for the RS-series which leads me to a number of questions on the later (post-RS11) engines:
Firstly, why were so few of these engines built? I’ve heard that it was largely due to competition from GE and mostly EMD but many of these engines also had remarkably long lives, especially on railroads such as the GBW with their RS27s and RSD15s.
Second, what is a good compairable Alco workhorse B-B engine to say the GP38? After looking at technical data the RS32 comes to mind, but I could be wrong of course.
Thirdly, what was the reasoning behind putting such high horsepower (for the time) in such a small package in the RS27? My only thought is fast freight, with the combination of high-horsepower and relatively low tractive effort, (like the GE B40-8.)
Finally, I’ve noticed many short lines picked up second or third hand Alcos in the 80s and 90s. Was this due to any special running or maintainance characteristics of Alcos or just a price compairison to secondhand EMDs, and the unreliablity of GE’s Universal series?
Reasons for the relatively small numbers: 251-powered RS-series locomotives were not on the market for a long period (1956-63); the late 1950/early 1960s were a period of low locomotive sales in North America because the steam-replacement market had ended and the first-generation-replacement market had not quite yet begun; Alco was poorly competitive with EMD.
The more-or-less comparable Alco to the GP38 is the C-420.
The concept behind increasing horsepower on four axles (e.g., the RS-27, GP30, etc.) is to achieve unit reduction and a commensurate savings in initial capital and operating cost.
Actually very few short lines purchased second- or third-hand road Alcos in the '80s and '90s – but they received unrepresentative attention for their numbers. Low price was very much a virtue of the Alco, along with reasonable maintenance on the 251-engined models. Parts availability was not a virtue, nor were people skilled in maintaining them easy to come by, thus the low purchase price. GEs had the same issues; only with the broad sales of the B- and C- series GEs has there developed a reasonably large pool of people skilled in their maintenance as well as better parts availability.
The importance of parts and repair skills is often not recognized from the outside. For someone who knew what they were about there were bargains to be had in Alcos, assuming one wanted to devote some of his management time to the endless scrounging of spare parts, rather than other necessary items as marketing, general management, employee training, and track maintenance. Anyone who didn’t have prior experience and knowledge with Alcos was usually smart enough to stay away from them.
The RS27 was Alco’s response to the appearance of the GE U25B, it was quickly superseded by the improved C424. Most railroads were looking for more power in order to use fewer locomotives per train, just as they do today. At the time few railroads considered 6-axle power for anything other than use on light rail branches or heavy transfer assignments. The wheelslip problems experienced by all three builders changed railroads minds about the usefulness of 6-axle locomotives for mainline road power. Alco’s RS36, RS32, and RS24 were interim models featuring control improvements over their predecessors, but w
Thanks for the responses, very helpful! I’ve always wondered why SOO only bought the two RS27s, being such an EMD-heavy road (though that may have come later.) Do you know what the reasoning behind their purchase of the U30s was by them? Again it seemed an odd choice.
At the time of the time of the RS27 purchase the Soo had a fairly large fleet of S2, S4, RS1, RS3 (converted from RSC2 and RSC3 models) as well as FA-1 and FB-1 locomotives. While the EMDs were superior they weren’t overwhelmingly so. The Soo Line was a drag service railroad, and the strong GE electrical systems made the Alcos competitive, when GE came out with their own locomotives, Alco’s goose was cooked with the Soo Line. The strong electrical system is what kept the U30Cs on the system as long as they did.
Problems with GP35s and GP40s wheelslip and burning up traction motors in drag service, long delivery times for SD40s, and GE was willing to take old Alcos, Baldwins or EMDs in trade. EMD was only willing to take old EMDs in trade or offer a very token amount for other manufacturer’s locomotives. By the time these locomotives were ordered, the Soo’s problems with the RS27s had soured them on further Alco purchases.