Perhaps the OP should consider a Plymouth or Brookville industrial design. It might be a better fit.
Contact this company.
Custom Locomotives - Greenville, South Carolina - Republic Locomotive
I don’t think the OP actually has a need for a switcher. It sounds like a “what if” that was just very poorly worded.
Clyde and all the other EMD associates got their engines from LaGrange. AFAIK, EMD did not allow anyone to build their engines locally until the Indian Railways contract in the 90’s. But EMD did not do a lot protect their drawings so unauthorized builders started making copies, when the first one was I don’t know.
You are right about what if locomotive.What i was looking at was something like street car trackage with that kind of curves and buying 10 locomotives to replace GE 44 ton locomotives. Gary
I have been distracted by a number of other things and have missed much of this discussion. However It seems to me that a GA8 or GA18 would be more suitable than a G6B if light weight and sharp curves are a problem…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EMD_GA8
The diagram shows the concept most clearly
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:S300排列圖.jpg
Interestingly, Taiwan had both the GA8 and the related GL8
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EMD_GL8
The Australian G6B was a derivative of the EMD GL8 tailored to Victorian Railways requirements.
https://www.victorianrailways.net/motive%20power/ydie/ydie.html
The diagram is most useful in explaining this locomotive.
https://www.victorianrailways.net/motive%20power/diagrams/ydia01.html
The VR was operated by the Victorian State Government, and despite the perception that governments spend money without consideration, the VR was remarkably thrifty with its expenditure and the G6B (Y class) was a truly amazing example of this.
Way back in 1910, the VR decided to electrify its suburban rail network in Melbourne. I posted a documentary video “On Time” that showed these trains in another thread in these forums.
They ordered the equipment from GE but actual construction was delayed until 1919 by the First World War.
The powered EMU cars used riveted plate frame power trucks (as might be expected in 1919 or earlier) but after 30 to 35 years of service these trucks began to fail. Although new steel trains with cast trucks were being obtained, the VR had to replace the riveted plate frame trucks with one
If you’re just switching an industry, you’d go get yourself a Trackmobile. If you were a running locomotive on the national network, you’d go get yourself a used SW-anything and have it rebuild/upgraded. I’d shoot for something with a 567C engine (SW-900, SW-1200) and Flexicoil trucks for reliability’s sake, easy of maintenance.
I worked for companies and seen other companies that had in house rail networks. They used sw1200 on the straighter tracks and GE 44 ton on very curved track. One used fireless locomotive but had give it up because the maker went out business. Some of these were looking for a little bigger than GE 44 ton for the curved track. Gary
I can’t help but wonder if we’re trying to answer this question backward. What does the OP actually need the locomotive to do, in terms of number of loads and service, and how sharp are the horizontal and vertical curves, and what is the state of track construction?
And now that it’s been mentioned, what is the specific timeframe of this effort?
I still don’t quite understand the tiny downsized engine requirement. Making a locomotive capable of negotiating very sharp curves is done in the truck design, and how the bolsters, traction-motor cables and cooling, and air lines are rigged. A smaller engine would only be a matter of fuel economy or marginal weight reduction, and if either of those is a concern I think re-engining with something other than a GM locomotive two-stroke would be a wise idea.
The switchers used by many interurbans were designed for the curves found in streetcar trackage. OTOH, I’m not sure if the coupler mountings would be kosher for a locomotive subject to FRA regulation.
In all the cases I was involved with, the curving limit was driven by the coupler length and swing of the locomotive and those same factors of the vehicle it’s coupled to; the limit of the single unit curving is always a lesser radius. For many years I’ve been fascinated with the 8 axle turbines and U50’s with their truck attached couplers and draft gear, similar to many scale models for dealing with tight curves. To deal with the increasing locomotive length over that last several generations, I once proposed a 3 axle radial truck with integral draft gear/coupler/endplate, but got a very chilly reception from the rest of the organization.
Dave
A smaller engine would only be a matter of fuel economy or marginal weight reduction, and if either of those is a concern I think re-engining with something other than a GM locomotive two-stroke would be a wise idea.
Ironically, the G6B resulted from the Victorian Railways trying a smaller four stroke engine. This was the Mercedes Benz MB 820 b, a V-12 of 650HP, installed in a locally built locomotive of Krupp design with a rod coupled 0-6-0 wheel arrangement. Unfortunately the MB 820 b suffered from cavitation in the water jackets but the unfamiliarity of the whole concept made the “W class” unpopular from the start and production stopped half way through the order.
https://www.victorianrailways.net/motive%20power/wdie/wdie.html
As a result of this episode, any fuel consumption penalty with the 6-567C was accepted without question. In cidentally, alone amongst 567C engines in Australia, the 6-567C developed its 600HP at 800 rpm rather than the usual 835 rpm. The 6-645E was rated at 750HP at the usual 900 rpm.
I worked around industry railroads that used used rail and used ties on a gravel bed. One of these railroads borrowed a geep from a major railroad that derailed. The major railroad had to bring mobile crane to rerail the locomotive. It was decided to only use small locomotives.Gary
It sounds like they were overly frugal…
Sounds like something that the mudchicken has mentioned repeatedly. The industry operation is going to have to spend some bucks on track maintenance and upkeep or they might wind up with derailments of standing cars.
Wonder of wonders these industry railroads ran for years with no derailments but some class 1 railroads had branches that were that bad with very little trouble because the speed limit was 10 mph. Gary
Most branches with 10 MPH speed limits generally had triweekly or less frequent service and were a few steps away from abandonment. A sizable industry operation with trackage more elaborate than one or two spurs will have to spend some money on maintenance.
I worked for companies cut every corner they could. Some midwestern railroads had branches that had triweekly service 9 months of the year with something like SW1 with maybe 5 cars but in the fall ALCO RSD5s and Baldwin roadswitchers would haul 30 to 50 cars a day on a 5 days a week.Gary