|
|
Post by valenciajim on Oct 27, 2017 14:53:37 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by bnsf971 on Oct 28, 2017 3:27:33 GMT -8
It will be interesting to see how the railroads handle having to roll their own again.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Ferro Kid on Oct 30, 2017 18:39:25 GMT -8
When I was just a kid -- late 1950s -- like a football team's home town, loco builders were legendary enough to be referred to by the city of their main plant: EMD was "La Grange", ALCo was "Schenectady", Fairbanks-Morse was "Beloit" (except in its early days when some units were built in Erie, hence the reference to "Erie Builts"), Baldwin was "Eddystone", and GE was "Erie." Of course, Baldwin and Fairbanks-Morse exited the locomotive business, except for parts, before 1960, and now GE is even largely leaving its namesake.
|
|
|
|
Post by alcoc430 on Nov 2, 2017 12:56:52 GMT -8
Oh sure once they killed off Alco they decide they dont want the business after all. Thanks GE
|
|
|
|
Post by kentuckysouthernrwy on Nov 2, 2017 16:30:31 GMT -8
Maybe they’re afraid of the Chinese...they’ve taken over the model locomotive business...real ones are next?
|
|
|
|
Post by canrailfan on Nov 2, 2017 17:02:16 GMT -8
Just another example of shareholders demanding short term gains and not caring about the long term. The incoming CEO has said he will sell $20 Billion of GE's assets to "streamline the portfolio", driven by analyst's expectations and institutional shareholder demands.
Certainly may hurt GE Transportation's locomotive sales and give EMD an advantage until a deal is done.
Siemens AG is rumoured to be a possible buyer.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Ferro Kid on Nov 2, 2017 21:34:31 GMT -8
[SNIP] Siemens AG is rumoured to be a possible buyer. Yup, the first word that popped into my mind when I saw the story was "Siemens!" |
|
|
|
Post by bluedash2 on Nov 17, 2017 11:47:32 GMT -8
Just another example of shareholders demanding short term gains and not caring about the long term. The incoming CEO has said he will sell $20 Billion of GE's assets to "streamline the portfolio", driven by analyst's expectations and institutional shareholder demands. Certainly may hurt GE Transportation's locomotive sales and give EMD an advantage until a deal is done. Siemens AG is rumoured to be a possible buyer. Sadly in my observations it seems that the demands of short term gains are all shareholders in general care about. I guess nothing else about how to run a business matters. What ever happened to long term stability? Looks like GE made it official the other day about getting out of the locomotive business. It will be interesting to see what happens. |
|
|
|
Post by bnsf971 on Nov 17, 2017 15:37:09 GMT -8
That's the new American Way.
Get in, do whatever it takes to make the absolute most money in the shortest possible time, then get out before the whole thing crashes and burns.
Repeat as much as possible.
|
|
|
|
Post by bluedash2 on Nov 17, 2017 22:02:49 GMT -8
That's the new American Way. Get in, do whatever it takes to make the absolute most money in the shortest possible time, then get out before the whole thing crashes and burns. Repeat as much as possible. Nothing like self destruction! |
|
|
|
Post by lyonwonder on Nov 25, 2017 19:07:33 GMT -8
Alco would still be in business had GE sold off their locomotive division decades ago since Alco would have bought it.
|
|
|
|
Post by ncrc5315 on Nov 25, 2017 20:13:28 GMT -8
Alco would still be in business had GE sold off their locomotive division decades ago since Alco would have bought it. Doubt it. There is an interesting White Paper written by some Harvard economists, explaining why ALCO failed, and EMD excelled, mostly had to do with the attitude of ALCO management. |
|
|
|
Post by bnsf971 on Nov 26, 2017 4:15:03 GMT -8
Maybe Fairbanks Morse will buy it. They are, or were the last time I checked, still in business.
|
|
|
|
Post by ncrc5315 on Nov 26, 2017 8:40:18 GMT -8
Doubt it. There is an interesting White Paper written by some Harvard economists, explaining why ALCO failed, and EMD excelled, mostly had to do with the attitude of ALCO management. Alco. In 1955 the name was changed from American Locomotive Company to Alco Products, aka Alco. Not ALCo, not ALCO since it's not an acroynm. Just like Ford Motor Company is Ford, not FORD. Etc... Alco Products was a division of Studebaker-Worthington at the end. The paper that I was referring to, was about ALCo from the 1930's through the late 1940's, so it would have been ALCo. If the paper had been written about ALCo after 1955 then, yes, it would have been Alco. |
|
|
|
Post by valenciajim on Nov 26, 2017 13:24:46 GMT -8
Maybe Fairbanks Morse will buy it. They are, or were the last time I checked, still in business. The following is from Wikipedia: "The ALCO 251 diesel engine is still manufactured by Fairbanks-Morse of Beloit, Wisconsin, a company which also manufactured diesel locomotives. Additionally, Alco diesel engines are used to power the NASA Crawler Transporter." |
|
|
|
Post by valenciajim on Nov 26, 2017 13:34:43 GMT -8
Alco would still be in business had GE sold off their locomotive division decades ago since Alco would have bought it. Doubt it. There is an interesting White Paper written by some Harvard economists, explaining why ALCO failed, and EMD excelled, mostly had to do with the attitude of ALCO management. Here is a link to the white paper. It contains some very interesting reading for executives today who underestimate the rate of change and disruption in the marketplace. utahrails.net/articles/alco-v-emd.php |
|
|
|
Post by gevohogger on Nov 27, 2017 9:55:57 GMT -8
The following is from Wikipedia: "The ALCO 251 diesel engine is still manufactured by Fairbanks-Morse of Beloit, Wisconsin... Itself now a part of Enpro Industries. Or is it EnPro? ENPRO? ENPRo? Don't know... Don't care. |
|
|
|
Post by Brakie on Nov 29, 2017 13:56:24 GMT -8
Alco died a slow death because of several things to include high maintenance costs. When railroads was leaning toward diesels Alco was still holding in steam mentality.
Alco's end started with EMD's GP7..It was clear EMD won the race.
Train Magazine's "All Alco" issue tells the sad tale of Alco.
|
|
|
|
Post by Brakie on Nov 30, 2017 2:36:13 GMT -8
Alco died a slow death because of several things to include high maintenance costs. When railroads was leaning toward diesels Alco was still holding in steam mentality. Alco's end started with EMD's GP7..It was clear EMD won the race. Train Magazine's "All Alco" issue tells the sad tale of Alco. The Harvard article mentioned previously: utahrails.net/articles/alco-v-emd.php To sum up: Bad marketing, far more than any other factor. They could have turned it around, but they didn't (myopic management). ALCo was pretty much doomed by the beginning of WWII, 10 years before the GP7. The gov't suspending open markets in locomotives during WWII really sealed the deal. EMD got the bulk of road loco orders with ALCo & minority firms assigned switcher orders. Alco never regained a leadership role, though business picked up 1946 to 1952. By 1960, GE was making sure Alco wasn't going to be the #2 builder. A few years later, there was no place for #3, two builders were enough. Maybe if they went with Sterling Cooper in 1960.... GE was once Alco's electrical parts source and they bugged out when they started receiving complaints about Alco failures. Alco had the first road switcher the RS-1 followed by the RS-2 in 1946. EMD would stumble in the road switcher market until EMD's chief engineer Dick Dilworth designed the GP7 which was never meant to be a road engine according to Dilworth. EMD had several switchers in the book like the NCs and NWs. I highly recommend reading that all Alco issue if you can find one. Its a eye opener on why Alco failed in the diesel market.. One reason Alco lasted so long was the railroads wanted to keep EMD in check. |
|
|
|
Post by jonklein611 on Nov 30, 2017 7:39:31 GMT -8
GE was once Alco's electrical parts source and they bugged out when they started receiving complaints about Alco failures. Alco had the first road switcher the RS-1 followed by the RS-2 in 1946. EMD would stumble in the road switcher market until EMD's chief engineer Dick Dilworth designed the GP7 which was never meant to be a road engine according to Dilworth. EMD had several switchers in the book like the NCs and NWs. I highly recommend reading that all Alco issue if you can find one. Its a eye opener on why Alco failed in the diesel market.. One reason Alco lasted so long was the railroads wanted to keep EMD in check. GE didn't "bug out", they ended the joint Alco-GE marketing agreement. GE continued to be Alco's electrical equipment supplier until the end of Alco. GE started selling their own line of domestic heavy-duty locomotives in 1960 but they were already a major player in the small loco and export market. The Harvard paper explains why Alco failed quite well, thanks. Footnote 2 refers to "Corporate Response to Technological Change: Dieselization and the American Railway Locomotive Industry during the Twentieth Century," by Albert Churella, (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, The Ohio State University, 1994), which examines the six major firms in the locomotive industry - ALCo, Baldwin, Lima, Fairbanks-Morse, the Electro-Motive Division of General Motors, and General Electric. I'd like to read that. I read the Trains issue/article. It makes some good points, but the Harvard paper nails it and backs it up with extensive citations. EMD also wanted to keep Alco around. The paper explains. Check it out. When looking for papers, google scholar is your friend: www.jstor.org/stable/23703096?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents |
|
|
|
Post by Brakie on Nov 30, 2017 7:46:37 GMT -8
Thanks but, I will go with the Trains articles since the authors was around when the stuff went down.
Its kind of sad that Alco was well ahead in the road switcher market only to lose that market to EMD. The railroads wanted 2 builders in the game so, they could keep EMD prices in check.
You can see how fast the railroads dropped Alco after GE entered the locomotive market.
|
|
|
|
Post by bnsf971 on Nov 30, 2017 15:48:54 GMT -8
To be extremely brief and to the point, Alco began to go out of business the day GE began building the second-best locomotive.
|
|
|
|
Post by santafe49 on Nov 30, 2017 16:17:49 GMT -8
Berkshire Hathaway buys GE locomotive division. Closes Erie and moves everything to Dallas. Builds loco's for BNSF. Close the circle when the railroad builds it's own loco's just like in the ol' steam days.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2017 17:19:16 GMT -8
To be extremely brief and to the point, Alco began to go out of business the day GE began building the second-best locomotive. Actually, this is accurate and I completely agree with this point! Former heads of more than one railroad operating department, including but not limited to SP, related the exact same statement to various authors who have written on behalf of Diesel Era Magazine (Withers Publishing).
The point at which GE began building the second best locomotive is debateable, due to horrific oil leaks in the U-boat series. However, it was the perception of GE building the second best locomotive that did Alco in. The point at which the railroads generally perceived GE had the second best locomotive occurred sometime between 1960 and 1966, depending upon whom you talk to about which model(s).
Sure isolated lots of Alco Century production had quite notable careers, with several extant survivors still in use or at least around to this day (eg. Lehigh Valley C-420's), while other production lots either had notable maintenance headaches, or worse...
I have a friend who is a practicing mechanical engineer. He just told me at dinner this evening that the reliability of the GE locomotives, at least the recent models, is not or has not been perhaps what was expected. The railroads buy GE engines partly due to price and fuel economy, where GE has been in the lead for years, but the actual in service reliability of GE production...appears to some observers not to match that of the EMD Dash 2 series.
So my question is, does GE know that and are they going to pull the plug and get out while the getting is good?
|
|
|
|
Post by bnsf971 on Dec 3, 2017 4:40:17 GMT -8
We had a pair of RS3s, and a pair of GP7s. The RS3s had 100 more horsepower, quicker acceleration, and could pull more. The GP7s rode better, were somewhat more reliable, and seemed for want of a better term, more refined. In fairness, though, the RS3s were former Conrail/PC/NYC units, so I'm sure you can guess their maintenance history (none), while the Geeps were one owner units that had been better maintained.
We also had a GE 44 tonner, but it wouldn't be a fair comparison between an industrial switcher and a mainline road switcher.
|
|
|
|
Post by Christian on Dec 3, 2017 6:47:29 GMT -8
Albert Churella - certainly a well-known rail historian. As is Don Strack who posted this article. This Alco Products/EMD article certainly debunks some hobby shop mythology. |
|
|
|
Post by calzephyr on Dec 28, 2017 15:42:48 GMT -8
The Tier IV rules probably are a factor in the locomotive business. GE was first to get the new units out and captured a lot of the latest Tier IV units, but new orders for new units have been very slow for the past year. NS is rebuilding a lot of their older units and converting many into wide cab or safety type cabs. With slowing coal traffic for the past few years, a lot of older units are now surplus for the UP and the BNSF. Overseas orders have been decent until recently keeping the diesel production lines going.
It will be interesting to see if the new tax bill allowing equipment to be written off in 12 months will change the order books for new units.
Larry
|
|
|
|
Post by The Ferro Kid on Jan 6, 2018 11:01:31 GMT -8
[SNIP] I have a friend who is a practicing mechanical engineer. He just told me at dinner this evening that the reliability of the GE locomotives, at least the recent models, is not or has not been perhaps what was expected. The railroads buy GE engines partly due to price and fuel economy, where GE has been in the lead for years, but the actual in service reliability of GE production...appears to some observers not to match that of the EMD Dash 2 series. [SNIP] It would be interesting to know if GE's referenced quality problems are prime mover, electrical, software, or just here, there, and anywhere. |
|
