Talk:ALCO RS-2

CNW 1503
There is reason to believe CNW 1503 was originally a demo, likely Alco 1503. 76.223.76.83 (talk) 00:38, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Turbocharger Redesign
Some delay to the beginning of RS-2 production was experienced by Alco-GE. This was because the turbocharger manifold had to be redesigned for a lower mounting. The lower mounting was necessary to enable a 12V-244 engine to fit under the hood of the proposed new roadswitchers. This new turbocharger mounting was tested and complete by the Summer of 1946. See Steinbrenner p. 246. --SSW9389 14:49, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Infobox
has C&NWRy drawings and spec sheets for their loco’s, that’s where most of this comes from. Sammy D III (talk) 19:00, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Too short radius
57° ( 104.79 ft 104.79 ft, law of sines). A 57° curve seems to be unrealistically sharp. Even 51° 116.14 ft 116.14 ft is sharp. Could some one check this? Peter Horn User talk 17:47, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

This linked webpage states 21 degrees: http://www.thedieselshop.us/DataRS-2.HTML --SSW9389 18:06, 3 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Oops, I think. Dorin (1972) shows C&NW had only one RS2, #1503. Someone above thought it may have been a demo. It shows: "MINIMUM CURVE 57° or 100' RAD." Next page RS3 shows "MINIMUM CURVE  LOCO. TO CAR, LOCO. TO LOCO. SAME TYPE 21° OR 273 FT. RAD.". (The italics are theirs). My guess would be that 57° is locomotive only and 21° is real world. Sorry about that. Sammy D III (talk) 19:30, 3 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Most road engines show 21° with train, most switchers just show 57°, switchers must be loco only? Baldwin DS 4-4-660 shows "with train 44°", the sharpest I could find that mentions car or train. Sammy D III (talk) 21:07, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
 * A 100 ft radius would be a 60° curve, even worse. After the CNR bought the Cornwall Street Railway the CN switcher was not able to negotiate a tight curve into an industrial area. Th CSR ran some freight trains on some of its tracks. A 44° curve means a 133.47 ft radius and a 21° curve means a 274.37 ft radius. Peter Horn User talk 23:27, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I cannot do math. The numbers are close, but they should be exact. Calculator vs. slide-rule?
 * I've had fun looking at info sheets. EMC/EMD switchers to SW1200 say "57° or 100 ft. rad." SW-9 #1101 specifically shows "loco to car 57° or 100 ft. radius" and "loco. to loco. same type 39° or 150 ft. rad.".
 * I went outside and looked at 100 ft radius. That's tight. But a SW-9 has trucks rotating on a 22 ft centerline. Cars were smaller, too. Could you have done that in the stockyards or steel mills?
 * Our big interurban, the C.A.&E., ran on the CTA's 90 ft radius and early on it did street running. Smaller ones used streetcar lines. They had radial couplers, though. No real loco could do either one of those. But Whitcomb 44-ton #405 might. "76° or 75 ft. rad.".
 * Anyway, I think we agree that it probably should be 21°, right? That seems to be some sort of industry standard. Have a good day. Sammy D III (talk) 02:17, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
 * A 76° curve means a 81.21 ft radius, as calculated by using the rule of sines. Peter Horn User talk 21:50, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Algerian units
We edit-conflicted; sorry about that. It's possible that the Diesel shop is wrong about the Algerian units, but they're relying on Extra 2200 South. Is there better information? Mackensen (talk) 14:05, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

My notes on the subject are on the RSC-2 talk page. This is a case where Extra 2200 South got it wrong and the error has been repeated. Both the photo and the Preston Cook article with photos are definitive. SSW9389 (talk) See Preston Cook's excellent article "WHEN EMD, ALCO & BALDWIN MET IN MORROCCO" (pp22-35) in the March 2011 issue of Railroads Illustrated. Cook has photos of the Algerian RSC-2s in passenger service into Oujda, Morocco. SSW9389 (talk)
 * Which article is that? Mackensen (talk) 14:14, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'll work on getting that. Cook did a very fine set of articles on the SDP40F. Mackensen (talk) 14:19, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
 * We'll probably want an explanatory note at some point. Seems like there's a lot of inconsistent information about the RS-2/RS-3. I'm not sure how Pinkepank arrived at 383 but everyone repeats it. Mackensen (talk) 14:23, 23 April 2017 (UTC)


 * I've obtained Cook's article; I don't know that this helps us. He observed RSC-2s and RSC-3s and photographed several of the former, but there aren't any details. Their presence doesn't prove the existence of Algerian RS-2s one way or the other. Mackensen (talk) 12:21, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Extra 2200 South, The Diesel Shop RS-2 roster and Andy Inserra's Alco Export List all show the Algerian Railways first five units as RS-2s. They all agree on unit numbers and serial numbers. However the photograph on the Wiki RSC-2 page of Algerian 040DD1 shows the equally spaced wheels of an A-1-A truck. Preston Cook's photos show the same thing. This is a case where the original writer, presumably in Extra 2200 South got it wrong and that error was copied by both The Diesel Shop and The Alco Export List. And the Alco Specification numbers for the RS-2 and RSC-2 are the same. See http://alcoworld.railfan.net/ars15-20.htm What adds to the confusion are the five Algerian RSC-3s which are numbered DG1-DG5. Inserra's list shows them as RS-2s built in 1950-51. Steinbrenner on page 295 states that Alco exported five RSC-3s to join the five RSC-2 already in Algeria. SSW9389 (talk)


 * The trouble is we don't know how or why Pinkepank arrived at the figure of 383. The Diesel Shop, even with the unlikely Algerian units, totals 381 (I think). Foster repeats 383, probably relying on the same information as Pinkepank. This represents a revision; Pinkepank gave the even higher figure of 415 in his original book (1967). He's silent on exports in both books. Unless there's a published source correcting this, I think we have to abide by 383. Mackensen (talk) 17:31, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

RS-2 Demonstrators
There were four RS-2 demonstrators. Two went to the Monon, one to the Boston & Maine and one to Santa Fe. Working on identities. SSW9389 (talk) Alco RS-2 demonstrator serial numbers are: 74992, 75143, 75942 and 77918. The first two went to the Monon as #28 and 29. Data conflicts as to which serial was which Monon number. The third serial was Alco 1500 2nd went to Boston & Maine #1500. That number doesn't show on the Diesel Shop B&M roster, but does show in the December 1970 Extra 2200 South Roster. The last serial became Santa Fe #2110, then Santa Fe #2099. SSW9389 (talk) Other online resources will not match, should the disposition information about railroads that purchased RS-2 and then disappeared into larger railroads be ignored? There are several errors on The Diesel Shop roster that have been carried into the Wikipedia roster. Why? For example T&P #1100 was the original number of TP-MP Terminal #23. The unit was built for T&P in 1949 and became a MP-TP Terminal unit in 1952. The same thing happened with the Algerian RSC-2s that are listed on the Diesel Shop page as RS-2s. Notes clarify what happened to units. Or all this can be posted on the talk page, but the notes will make the cited references questionable because of provable errors. SSW9389 (talk) Another point, other editors will wonder for example why the B&M which had 10 RS-2s only shows 9 on the roster. The Monon had 9 units, but the roster only shows 7. The Santa Fe had the one RS-2, but it is not shown on the roster. The demonstrator dispositions will lessen the number of extra edits to what is an "original" owners roster.SSW9389 (talk)
 * I've seen references to a No. 1600; obviously it would be one of the 1600 hp models. I've seen other sources claiming 1600 was an RS-3. That would make sense, but it's also possible that the number was re-used. Mackensen (talk) 14:43, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Interesting. That level of detail probably isn't necessary for a summary of the topic. Mackensen (talk) 11:08, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, yes, I think it can and probably should be ignored. This article should be written in summary style, and the disposition of individual locomotives is trivial. The information about their disposition is unreliable, and the collation of that information borders on original research. I think you make a strong argument to suppress the original owners altogether. Reliable sources agree on the number constructed (383), so we could leave it at that and link out to the Diesel Shop roster in the external links section (or not, if it's unreliable). Mackensen (talk) 12:30, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Steinbrenner
There are references in the page history, but not the article itself, to a source called Steinbrenner. The lower figure of 378 locomotives comes from there. What source is this? Mackensen (talk) 14:49, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

The Steinbrenner reference is: Steinbrenner, Richard T. (2003). The American Locomotive Company: A Centennial Remembrance. On Track Publishers LLC, New Brunswick, NJ. ISBN 0-911122-07-9. Richard Steinbrenner wrote the bible on Alco locomotives. SSW9389 (talk)

Early RS-2 Traction Motors
Someone has put the GE 752A as the traction motor used on the RS-2. That's likely the traction motor used on a large number of RS-2s. But the first 752 traction motors were installed in the New York Central's FA-1 FB-1 FA-1 sets built in February 1947. That leaves four months of RS-2 production where some other type of traction motor was used. It was very likely the GE 726 traction motor that was used. SSW9389 (talk) 18:37, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Article Lead Section
There's been a template asking for a rewrite of the lead section since 2017. In the past few days I've rewritten the lead section - do other editors think it better meets the standards of Wikipedia and the template can be removed, or does it need further improvement? Trainsandotherthings (talk) 15:23, 29 July 2021 (UTC)