The letter from McClean obviously represents the initial conception of the locomotive, partly in response to the perceived threat from GE. In fact even the GE locomotives were not delivered to Queensland until November 1951.
Three years is not a long time to design and develop an entirely new locomotive, and I think New Zealand were still buying them in the early 1960s, and a few are still in service in NZ with chopped noses, engines rebuilt to 645 specifications, and a companion alternator and AC driven cooling fans, suggesting that the lower cost mechanical drive fan might not have been a success.
The trucks did come in both two and three axle versions, and New Zealand kept their three axle trucks even through the rebuild in the 1980s.
The three axle truck had a ten feet wheelbase, rather than the nine suggested, and normal axle guides and coil springs were used rather than leaf springs.
By 1954 the 567B had been replaced by the 567C, and the rating of the twelve cylinder engine was 1125 HP if fitted with the D15 generator, or 1310 HP with the larger D22 generator. Only two G12 units were built with the D15, both for Hong Kong but the remainder had the higher rating. All the G8s had the smaller generator and were rated at 875 HP.
I think Louis used a photo of a CN standard gauge unit with the centre axle removed from the three axle trucks in the DSG, and possibly in “50 years” as well.
Ah yes, the letter is from 1951. But wait a minute. How come they were working on a new design, when EMD already had the GP7 in production, since 1949? Was it initially just for narrow-gauge lines?
The G8 and G12 were purpose designed for export to areas with restricted clearances and rail loading. Many of these were narrow gauge, but one of the first customers for the G8 was the Victorian Railways, Australia with a 5’ 3" gauge, who were interested in light axle loads, at least compared to US domestic units.
The G12 was only 12 feet high, 8’11" wide and 43 feet long over body.
The GP7 was 14’6" high, 10’3" wide and 52 feet over the body.
The G12 weighed about 75 tons and the GP7 weighed about 120 tons.
I do miss the “yard goats” running around switching trains. They seemed to fit nicely into the yards where Dad worked which is not large like some others. The road engines never did any switching in those days, now they do, because that’s all they have to do it. Haven’t seen a “goat” in years.
My observations tend to show that GP38’s or various de-rated B-B road switchers are usually assigned to yard work. In the Chicago area, it seems that IHB is the only road that still has a sizable fleet of end-cab switchers in regular service.
It’s interesting that it’s kinda gone full-circle back to the steam era. Back c. 1895, railroads often didn’t buy custom-built switchers, they just took old small-drivered 2-8-0s or 2-6-0s, removed the pilot wheels, and made it an 0-8-0 or 0-6-0 “switcher”.
First off, if you have ever tried to wiggle down into the bowels of a short-short hood unit in order to use the toilet, or any other reason for that matter, you would truly appreciate the high short hoods of the N&W and Southern!!!
Second, this myth that the N&W awalys ran long hood forward needs to be put to rest! Didn’t happen folks!
I only ever saw one of the engines that had the little Keebler Elves bathroom door. Seems like every other short hood engine they put steps in and a regular door.
Old Southern engineer once told me “if they sent us out short hood first, we thought they were trying to kill us!”. The lines they ran on had a lot of little country road hump crossings, and a lot of grade xing accidents.
Absolutely correct. Often saw N&W run shor hood forward. Especially on the Virginia Creeper with two back to back. Needed the vision on many curves especially those15+ degrees.