This is the first time that I have ever seen anything on this locomotive, aside from a page in the diesel spotters guide. Just to add a little sidenote,a the bulk of the locomotive builders were not able to compete with EMD. They had constructed a factory specifically for building diesels, and a number of them used power plants that were built for maritime applications. Depending on who you talk to the about the ALCO's you will get different opinions. When GE entered the market with the U-25b, it took a lot of effort to get them working It wasn't till the 1990's that what was GE Transportation Systems surpassed EMD.Very interesting video. Might I suggest a video on the Pennsylvania Railroad's experimental electrics that eventually lead to the E-44, the E-3b, E-2c, and the E-2b?
AN INTERESTING VIDEO AND VERY COMPLETE INFORMATION REGARDING THIS UNIT! HAD THEY KNOCKED A FEW MORE OUT , THEY MAY HAVE DEVELOPED WELL! THEY HAD THE INFRASTRUCTURE TO BUILD, WITH APPARENTLY ENGINEERING TALENT! WHILE I AM UNAWARE OF WHO SUPPLIED THE ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT, HAD THEY GONE WITH GE THEY WOULD HAVE DONE OK, AS COMPARED TO WESTINGHOUSE! ALSO A SOUTHERN US LOCOMOTIVE BUILDER WOULD HAVE BEEN SEEN MORE FAVORABLE TO SOUTHERN RAIL ROAD COMPANIES. (REMEMBERING THE CIVIL WAR)!! INGALLS, LIKE EMD WAS NEVER STEAM BUILDERS, HENCE WOULD HAVE BETTER RELATED TO DIESEL PRODUCTION AND ENGINEERING , AND COULD HAVE BEEN EMDs WORST NIGHTMARE! KEEP THEM ROLLING BROTHERS!! 👍👍
Nothing wrong with the Superior engines in locomotives, the Dutch 2200 class counting 150 examples served for more than 45 years proving reliable, the engines of these were a superior design built in license by Stork in the Netherlands, being a company which did build ship engines and other machinery as well.
Lots of emergency generators for industry, pumping stations and hospitals use the same generator set as once installed on the NS 2200 class. On the rails those sets racked up alot of operating hours. As emergency generator sets they are still in service. They only run at tests or at an emergency. Operating several of them and seeing them run perfectly synchronised on rpm and output gives any engineer a good buzz. 🤤
Nothing unusual about it either. Doyle McCormack was putting in an Alco diesel motor in his PA, but had to stop because the bottom oil pan was V shaped, since it came out of a ship.
Not even sure it was that really, I'd put it down to sensible management. The locomotive market was already saturated with diesels post-WII, and with less freight to move the railroads had less to spend, and EMD already having the lions share of the market thanks to their great products, it just made sense not to enter the market at all.
@@StaffordMagnus I would disagree. When would have been a better moment to enter the market, if not after the war? Many railroads made good profits during the war while not being able to replace older locos or doing proper maintenance due to material shortages. There was a huge investment backlog, and an opportunitiy to get a piece of the cake.
@@StaffordMagnus a big thing, is that you had EMD, BLW, ALCo, Plymouth, CLC, Lima, Westinghouse, various other smaller builders, and even MACK Trucks making diesel locomotives in this era. steam was still king, and most diesels built in this era were switching units. the appropriate market for this unit would have been branch lines, but railroads had plenty of older steam to shove on them. the best bet would have been marketing the 4S to shortlines. had they actually constructed the rest of the 5 units as demonstrators, things might have been different. the 4S was a poor choice of demo unit.
Great vid mate, thanks. Hey, you should do a story on South Australin Railways, in particular the 520 class. You'll understand when you see it! Cheers cobber.
The slide of Vanderbilt University features former Chancellor Nick Zeppos on the left. I know him....good guy. He stepped down years ago but still teaches there.
I read somewhere that Ingalls had issues of sourcing electrical components - by the way, the 4-S had Westinghouse equipment - and had to quote with delivery times of about two years, which was considerably more than the RRs were willing to accept.
I'll say this if you do another locomotive Builder I recommend looking up the history of the Glover Machine Works in Marietta Georgia, they do steam locomotives down here in Georgia until around the 1930s yet even now around seven of their engines still exist
I mean we here didn’t really go all-in with double-sided diesel locomotives, either due to concerns about streamlining or having to hire twice the number of crews per locomotive. While the PRR had double-sided electric locomotives (and Amtrak later on the NEC), in terms of diesels, I am only aware of six locomotives operated by the CNJ made by I think GE, each with probably 2,000 horsepower. None were preserved. Also with the setup of EMD E, F, or FP-series diesels with two A units on each end (often with 1-3 boosters in the middle) you get roughly the same layout as a double-sided diesel, only much longer.
I’ve never really understood why US locomotives never have a cab at each end like we have in Europe. The only successful single cab locos in the UK being the good old type 1 1000hp Class 20. Usually to be found coupled nose to nose… and still to be found in revenue earning service today 70 years on …
@@HistoryintheDarkStill can’t figure that 😂 I guess you just need to be American to understand. Especially as here in Europe everyone has been buying Class 66’s 😂 BTW I’d just like to say I LOVE your videos mate 👍
It comes down to expense. In North America, diesel road units rarely run as a single unit. If you need a group of locomotives to operate bi-directionally, you made sure that the last unit on the locomotive consist was pointing backwards. NA switch engines have excellent visibility in both directions, so you don't need to worry about those. The private railroad companies are all about saving every penny, so if money can be saved when ordering , it will be.
The market for diesel locomotives in the immediate postwar years was wide open rather than 'restricted' -- access to capital was enhanced by swollen wartime profits. The general problem for Ingalls was that they seem to have thought locomotive building was the important business, rather than customer support and service (which was one of Electro-Motive's fortes, in part due to Sloan; this is its own video...) Where Ingalls had an ace in the hole in the postwar years was with the 2000hp passenger unit, which was not exactly 'diesel-electric'. Ingalls shared with Baldwin the idea that the 'right' kind of railroad diesel was massive, relatively slow-speed, and hence durable, and this was true of the Superior engines here. This is what the diesel-electric could overcome with separate electric-motor drive, but at a substantial penalty in weight, cost, and complexity. Ingalls instead -- with maritime experience -- looked at adapting the Thomas D. Bowes tugboat drive (which was reanimating the stillborn V1 mechanical-drive steam turbine development over at PRR at about this time). This provided the ability to implement relatively lightweight Cardan-shaft drive as in Voith-transmission diesel-hydraulics, but without all the myriad drawbacks of hydrokinetic final drive -- in fact it promised the combination of very high but relatively nonslip starting TE with the ability to reach a road speed in excess of 120mph without overspeeding the diesels but without issues of birdsnesting or traction-motor cooling/contamination. A wide range of railroads had the idea of postwar streamlined trains running at very high speed to keep market share... What likely put the kibosh on this lovely potential perfect storm was the Naperville wreck, and the ICC re-enforcement of the Esch Act ATC provisions from the Twenties: 79mph for passenger or 59mph freight without functioning automatic train control. There was no real market for light high-speed passenger power, and by the time the 'lightweight trains of the Fifties' came about, even the FM Speed Merchant locomotives weren't very 'high speed' oriented.
This has nothing to do with the rail road but I never knew how big litton was, I’m familiar with litton engineering where they make glass lathes and equipment. I have a litton HSJ #10 was built in 40’s or early 50’s. There machines are still the industry standard for the US glass industry.
I have Question and some local history from my neck of da woods. Mr Curse That middles name.? "Ingersol" is that the same ingersol as in ingersol-rand?... i used their towable generators and other towable equipment for years. I live in the Lehigh Valley right by Americas first portland cement plant founded by david o saylor in the 1850s in coplay (prononced locally cop-lee) its surrounded by the ironton railroad trail "IRT"and is part of the D&L trail. (Delaware & lehigh watergap towpath heritage trail that goes from wilkes-barre to bristol pa) Sorry back to equipment i did masonary work for a few years, and ran alot of jackhammers off ingersol-rand towable genorators. its like a right of passage here in northampton where northampton cement corp was the world leader in cement until the 1980s. Around the time cabooses and livestock cars went out of use.
All the steam locomotive companies failed after the diesel age killed steam . Baldwin Lima Hamilton was the combination of the old steam companies. But they failed . Alco , a steam maker, did a good job as they had a good in house diesel. But they went under. Fairbanks Morse had good diesels but failed too. GE had the electrical end covered and found a good diesel. EMD (gm) had a great diesel and was able to discover the electrical end . So it turns out the steam people did not build locos they built boilers and steam engines on wheels . The winners had a diesel Emd or the electrical motors and controls GE. During WWII the government decreed what company could make what and GE and Emd were allowed to build Fidel electric full size locos , the other companies only steam or small diesel switchers.
As a Mississippian I can confidently say that the real reason Ingalls moved away from locomotive designs because they would've been TOO GOOD and would've felt bad stomping on the competition like EMD and Alco. Magnolia state ftw!!!!
TOO BAD THE LOCOMOTIVE WASN'T GIVEN BACK OR AT LEAST OFFERED BACK TO EAGLES OR HAD THE MUSEUM ASK FOR INGLES HELP TO SAVE IT DAVID ADAM GRENIS MAPLETON AVENUE BOULDER COLORADO USA
At least EMD saw the significance of 1900 and thought to sell her to a museum even if they couldn’t sell her, it’s the thought that counts
This is the first time that I have ever seen anything on this locomotive, aside from a page in the diesel spotters guide. Just to add a little sidenote,a the bulk of the locomotive builders were not able to compete with EMD. They had constructed a factory specifically for building diesels, and a number of them used power plants that were built for maritime applications. Depending on who you talk to the about the ALCO's you will get different opinions. When GE entered the market with the U-25b, it took a lot of effort to get them working
It wasn't till the 1990's that what was GE Transportation Systems surpassed EMD.Very interesting video. Might I suggest a video on the Pennsylvania Railroad's experimental electrics that eventually lead to the E-44, the E-3b, E-2c, and the E-2b?
AN INTERESTING VIDEO AND VERY COMPLETE INFORMATION REGARDING THIS UNIT!
HAD THEY KNOCKED A FEW MORE OUT , THEY MAY HAVE DEVELOPED WELL!
THEY HAD THE INFRASTRUCTURE TO BUILD, WITH APPARENTLY ENGINEERING TALENT!
WHILE I AM UNAWARE OF WHO SUPPLIED THE ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT, HAD THEY GONE WITH GE THEY WOULD HAVE DONE OK, AS COMPARED TO WESTINGHOUSE!
ALSO A SOUTHERN US
LOCOMOTIVE BUILDER
WOULD HAVE BEEN SEEN MORE FAVORABLE TO SOUTHERN RAIL ROAD COMPANIES.
(REMEMBERING THE CIVIL WAR)!!
INGALLS, LIKE EMD WAS NEVER STEAM BUILDERS, HENCE WOULD HAVE BETTER RELATED TO DIESEL PRODUCTION AND ENGINEERING , AND COULD HAVE BEEN EMDs WORST NIGHTMARE!
KEEP THEM ROLLING BROTHERS!!
👍👍
@@rossbryan6102I can confirm that they used GE electrical components in the 4-S.
Nothing wrong with the Superior engines in locomotives, the Dutch 2200 class counting 150 examples served for more than 45 years proving reliable, the engines of these were a superior design built in license by Stork in the Netherlands, being a company which did build ship engines and other machinery as well.
Lots of emergency generators for industry, pumping stations and hospitals use the same generator set as once installed on the NS 2200 class.
On the rails those sets racked up alot of operating hours.
As emergency generator sets they are still in service.
They only run at tests or at an emergency.
Operating several of them and seeing them run perfectly synchronised on rpm and output gives any engineer a good buzz. 🤤
Nothing unusual about it either. Doyle McCormack was putting in an Alco diesel motor in his PA, but had to stop because the bottom oil pan was V shaped, since it came out of a ship.
Thought Im not a rail fan( that's my brother's forte) my first ship when I joined the Navy was built at Inglles.
Never heard of this. This is going to be very intresting!
In this case marketing failed not the enginering.
As an engineer i can appreciate a good piece of enginering.
Not even sure it was that really, I'd put it down to sensible management. The locomotive market was already saturated with diesels post-WII, and with less freight to move the railroads had less to spend, and EMD already having the lions share of the market thanks to their great products, it just made sense not to enter the market at all.
@@StaffordMagnus I would disagree. When would have been a better moment to enter the market, if not after the war? Many railroads made good profits during the war while not being able to replace older locos or doing proper maintenance due to material shortages. There was a huge investment backlog, and an opportunitiy to get a piece of the cake.
@@StaffordMagnus a big thing, is that you had EMD, BLW, ALCo, Plymouth, CLC, Lima, Westinghouse, various other smaller builders, and even MACK Trucks making diesel locomotives in this era. steam was still king, and most diesels built in this era were switching units. the appropriate market for this unit would have been branch lines, but railroads had plenty of older steam to shove on them. the best bet would have been marketing the 4S to shortlines. had they actually constructed the rest of the 5 units as demonstrators, things might have been different. the 4S was a poor choice of demo unit.
Great vid mate, thanks. Hey, you should do a story on South Australin Railways, in particular the 520 class. You'll understand when you see it! Cheers cobber.
The slide of Vanderbilt University features former Chancellor Nick Zeppos on the left. I know him....good guy. He stepped down years ago but still teaches there.
I read somewhere that Ingalls had issues of sourcing electrical components - by the way, the 4-S had Westinghouse equipment - and had to quote with delivery times of about two years, which was considerably more than the RRs were willing to accept.
Ingalls seems like a well-run company, so not having a good supplier of electrical equipment was enough to keep them from entering the market.
A maritime engine inside a diesel locomotive sounds interesting, a modification was needed initially…
The GM&O used this switcher, the 4S. It is definitely better than Baldwin.
but not as good as a EMD
I'll say this if you do another locomotive Builder I recommend looking up the history of the Glover Machine Works in Marietta Georgia, they do steam locomotives down here in Georgia until around the 1930s yet even now around seven of their engines still exist
All American locomotives look weird to non-Americans.
I mean we here didn’t really go all-in with double-sided diesel locomotives, either due to concerns about streamlining or having to hire twice the number of crews per locomotive. While the PRR had double-sided electric locomotives (and Amtrak later on the NEC), in terms of diesels, I am only aware of six locomotives operated by the CNJ made by I think GE, each with probably 2,000 horsepower. None were preserved.
Also with the setup of EMD E, F, or FP-series diesels with two A units on each end (often with 1-3 boosters in the middle) you get roughly the same layout as a double-sided diesel, only much longer.
It works vice-versa for Americans looking at foreign locomotives too.
I’ve never really understood why US locomotives never have a cab at each end like we have in Europe. The only successful single cab locos in the UK being the good old type 1 1000hp Class 20. Usually to be found coupled nose to nose… and still to be found in revenue earning service today 70 years on …
Because we like hood units, which have good enough vision either way without changing cabs.
@@HistoryintheDarkStill can’t figure that 😂 I guess you just need to be American to understand. Especially as here in Europe everyone has been buying Class 66’s 😂
BTW I’d just like to say I LOVE your videos mate 👍
There are a few US locomotives that have a cab at each end
@@fanofeverything30465 do you have any links ?
It comes down to expense. In North America, diesel road units rarely run as a single unit. If you need a group of locomotives to operate bi-directionally, you made sure that the last unit on the locomotive consist was pointing backwards. NA switch engines have excellent visibility in both directions, so you don't need to worry about those. The private railroad companies are all about saving every penny, so if money can be saved when ordering , it will be.
The market for diesel locomotives in the immediate postwar years was wide open rather than 'restricted' -- access to capital was enhanced by swollen wartime profits. The general problem for Ingalls was that they seem to have thought locomotive building was the important business, rather than customer support and service (which was one of Electro-Motive's fortes, in part due to Sloan; this is its own video...)
Where Ingalls had an ace in the hole in the postwar years was with the 2000hp passenger unit, which was not exactly 'diesel-electric'. Ingalls shared with Baldwin the idea that the 'right' kind of railroad diesel was massive, relatively slow-speed, and hence durable, and this was true of the Superior engines here. This is what the diesel-electric could overcome with separate electric-motor drive, but at a substantial penalty in weight, cost, and complexity.
Ingalls instead -- with maritime experience -- looked at adapting the Thomas D. Bowes tugboat drive (which was reanimating the stillborn V1 mechanical-drive steam turbine development over at PRR at about this time). This provided the ability to implement relatively lightweight Cardan-shaft drive as in Voith-transmission diesel-hydraulics, but without all the myriad drawbacks of hydrokinetic final drive -- in fact it promised the combination of very high but relatively nonslip starting TE with the ability to reach a road speed in excess of 120mph without overspeeding the diesels but without issues of birdsnesting or traction-motor cooling/contamination. A wide range of railroads had the idea of postwar streamlined trains running at very high speed to keep market share...
What likely put the kibosh on this lovely potential perfect storm was the Naperville wreck, and the ICC re-enforcement of the Esch Act ATC provisions from the Twenties: 79mph for passenger or 59mph freight without functioning automatic train control. There was no real market for light high-speed passenger power, and by the time the 'lightweight trains of the Fifties' came about, even the FM Speed Merchant locomotives weren't very 'high speed' oriented.
I find that Diesel-electric to be pretty unique.
First time listener. This guy sounds like Dr. DEMENTO
I dare you to make a vid on all the abominations that BR has made (that you havent covered yet)
"They pulled out as quickly mas they entered"??? Wow...the jokes abound with THAT statement... 🤪
This has nothing to do with the rail road but I never knew how big litton was, I’m familiar with litton engineering where they make glass lathes and equipment. I have a litton HSJ #10 was built in 40’s or early 50’s. There machines are still the industry standard for the US glass industry.
I live 50 minutes worth of driving from Dectaur, so I’ve walked around in a location of their own history without knowing it
I have Question and some local history from my neck of da woods. Mr Curse That middles name.? "Ingersol" is that the same ingersol as in ingersol-rand?... i used their towable generators and other towable equipment for years. I live in the Lehigh Valley right by Americas first portland cement plant founded by david o saylor in the 1850s in coplay (prononced locally cop-lee) its surrounded by the ironton railroad trail "IRT"and is part of the D&L trail. (Delaware & lehigh watergap towpath heritage trail that goes from wilkes-barre to bristol pa) Sorry back to equipment i did masonary work for a few years, and ran alot of jackhammers off ingersol-rand towable genorators. its like a right of passage here in northampton where northampton cement corp was the world leader in cement until the 1980s. Around the time cabooses and livestock cars went out of use.
Why did he leave the "Little House on Prairie"?
All the steam locomotive companies failed after the diesel age killed steam .
Baldwin Lima Hamilton was the combination of the old steam companies. But they failed .
Alco , a steam maker, did a good job as they had a good in house diesel. But they went under.
Fairbanks Morse had good diesels but failed too.
GE had the electrical end covered and found a good diesel.
EMD (gm) had a great diesel and was able to discover the electrical end .
So it turns out the steam people did not build locos they built boilers and steam engines on wheels .
The winners had a diesel Emd or the electrical motors and controls GE.
During WWII the government decreed what company could make what and GE and Emd were allowed to build Fidel electric full size locos , the other companies only steam or small diesel switchers.
I get the vide you must have been an auctioneer in a previous life. 😊
As a Mississippian I can confidently say that the real reason Ingalls moved away from locomotive designs because they would've been TOO GOOD and would've felt bad stomping on the competition like EMD and Alco. Magnolia state ftw!!!!
wrong , the Ingalls locomotives were Junk
Mobile is pronounced "Mo-BEEL"
Thank you, I agree.
TOO BAD THE LOCOMOTIVE WASN'T GIVEN BACK OR AT LEAST OFFERED BACK TO EAGLES OR HAD THE MUSEUM ASK FOR INGLES HELP TO SAVE IT
DAVID ADAM GRENIS MAPLETON AVENUE BOULDER COLORADO USA