AT&SF FM passenger units, B&O Sharks

bobyar2001 · **Posted:** Fri Oct 19, 2007 1:00 am

Just some nice color photos of these impressive but unsuccessful units:

http://abpr2.railfan.net/abprphoto.cgi? ... anColl.jpg

http://abpr2.railfan.net/abprphoto.cgi? ... anColl.jpg

And a builders photo of these BLW Sharks for the B&O:

http://abpr2.railfan.net/abprphoto.cgi? ... anColl.jpg

hi-plains · **Posted:** Fri Oct 19, 2007 1:55 pm

What problem[s] did they have with them?

davew833 · **Posted:** Fri Oct 19, 2007 6:17 pm

ATSF only had one set of A-B-A Erie-builts. Much of the problem lay in the opposed-piston engine design, which was rushed into railroad production to compete with EMD and ALCO. It initially had reliability problems, and was difficult to work on because any problem with the bottom cylinders required removal of the top cylinder assemblies to reach them. Santa Fe's high standards for passenger service saw the less-than-reliable Erie-builts quickly bumped to secondary trains and by the time FM got the bugs out, ATSF and other railroads had lost interest.

Here's a link to a post on another message board with more info:

http://forum.atlasrr.com/discussion/top ... C_ID=23699

NH0401 · **Posted:** Fri Oct 19, 2007 7:49 pm

The locomotives were also plagued by all sorts of electrical problems. Grounds on the high voltage side were not an infrequent occurance. These locos shared the GE Amplidyne excitation system and GE electro-hydraulic governor with the 51 class Alco passenger units. The early incarnations of this equipment was quite problematic and eventually resulted in a GE sponsored effort to 'remanufacture' 8 to 10 year old Alco PA's with updated controls and mechanicals. The 90 was noty so blessed.

Yes, a set of PA's went to EMD for application of 567 engines.

Dave

davew833 · **Posted:** Fri Oct 19, 2007 8:36 pm

Thanks for the FM OP clarification... I knew my explanation didn't sound quite right!