Re: (erielack) equipment leases

["Chuck Yungkurth" <raildata_@_comcast.net>]

The RSDs and the C-628 had different truck pivoting designs. Problem wasn't 
the truck itself . The C628 had a tri-mount system instead of a conventional 
pivot. I understand redesigned for the C630s.

Chuck Y


- ----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bradley Butcher" <llyengalyn_@_hotmail.com>
To: "EL Mail List" <erielack_@_lists.railfan.net>
Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2008 1:23 PM
Subject: RE: (erielack) equipment leases


> Derailing? Sounds like the C628's were too long for their wheelbase?
>
> I have read 2 sides to the alco arguement here and else where. And I have 
> heard 1: that Alcos were crap and people ditched them as fast as they 
> could, and 2: that alcos are great reliable units and good fuel effecient 
> pullers with the proper TLC. So as an admited outsider these conflicting 
> stories just make me wonder what the bottom line truth really is?
>
> Now granted I don't think i've ever heard of regional out there running a 
> fleet of C628's but other models seem to do well. Were RSD15's any better 
> then the 628's?
>
> Also I read that the equipment trusts were the "old fashioned" way of 
> doing things. And that good old Bill White started the idea of leaseing 
> because it was easier to get funding then trying to sell equipment trusts. 
> Now this could answer my own question, because the C424's were before Mr 
> White came to the EL so therefore they were most likely trusts. But the 
> 425's were stated as leases. Also the 425's were not on a 12 year lease, 
> EL stopped making payments on the lease so Greyhound repossed them.
> But my last observation in this line is this. It sounds like Alco's 
> designs were perfectly fine, just that something was lacking in their 
> quality control.
>
>
>
>
>> From: raildata_@_comcast.net> To: erielack@lists.railfan.net> Subject: Re: 
>> (erielack) equipment leases> Date: Thu, 1 May 2008 10:32:20 -0600> > 
>> Almost all railroad cars and locomitives were procured on "equipment > 
>> trusts", not leases. On these trusts the railrroad made payments to the 
>> bank > issuing the trust. After making payments for the duration of the 
>> trust the > railroad was given title to the equipment and they could do 
>> as they wished > with it, but it was the rairlaods problem what to do 
>> with the "worn out" > equipment.> > I have followed all the Alco 
>> discussion here with interest.....and I sure > did love those Alcos but 
>> they were terrible locomotives. But romance doesn't > overcome the facts. 
>> There is a lot of difinitive matrial in scholorly books > about how Alco 
>> managment never really knew how to cope with the deisel age.> > When I 
>> got out of Penn State in 1953 with a degree in mechanical > engineering, 
>> I interview with Alco and GE's locomtive division. Even in m!
> y > youthful viewpoint I could tell that GE knew what they were doing ( at 
> the > time they were building gas turbines for the UP along with a huge 
> export > buiness). But talking to the Alco guys, who were old enough to be 
> my > grandfather, I could see that all they wanted were shop foremen and 
> there > were no engineering opportinities there. I would up going to IBM 
> becasue it > looked like the best job closes to home and I was going to 
> get > drafted...another story.> > About 10 years later I had another 
> opportunity to tour the Alco palnt and by > this time I had quite a lot of 
> design and production experience. It was > appaling how the place was run. 
> They literally built locos like you would a > brass model; except they 
> used chalk on steel plates and welding torches > instead of brass sheet, a 
> jeweler's say, and soldering iron. The electricla > work was done by a 
> bunch of guys wandering around who did the wiring like > they were doing a 
> house. At the tiem they were building!
>  the C-424s.> > Almost all Alco's sales in the PA era were don!
> e when a
> ll the railroads were > converting froms team and the diesle builders were 
> back ordered so they > ordered engines from who ever could supply them. 
> Later on it was usually > that Alco would give a better price or the 
> railraod wanted to share their > purchases. On almost every raiload that 
> bought PAs, FAs, and the S series > switchers they were the first to go 
> when the company got second generation> > The C628s were really bad news. 
> The D&H couldn't keep them on the track and > complained; to which Alco 
> more or less told them "tought". So after that, > the D&H, which ahd nver 
> bought anythign other than alsos and even served the > Alco palnt went to 
> GE. The Monon bought them and returned them to alco for > the same 
> reason.> > When I wrote the LV book, I interviewed teh guy who was Chief 
> Mechancial > Officer and he said he pleaded with top management not to buy 
> the ex Monon > units, but the price was so good that the powers that be 
> couldn't resist. He > told me thaay ont he firs!
> t trip out of Sayre they derailed three times. Soon > were placed in very 
> restrictive service.> > There are a lot more layers to this story. 
> Including the fact that gE and > Alco ahd to use 4 cycle engiens becasue 
> General Motors had the patents on > two cycle fuel injection systems 
> prettyw ell sewed up in the US. Also, the > Justice dept brought suite 
> against EMD claiming they monoploized the deisel > loco buisness, forcing 
> Baldwin and FM out of it and threatening ther > ailroads, etc. This was 
> all settled out of court after whereh EMD agreed tp > get down toa bout 
> 50% of the market, after which GE for the fisrt time got > into the US 
> road diesel business with the U25C.> > So there is a lot of fact out there 
> if one is willing to dig.....and put an > end to the "logic says that" or 
> "surely it msut ahve been that".....> > Sorry for the "sermonizing" but 
> every so often we need to get at the facts!> > Chuck Yungkurth> Boulder CO
>
> The Erie Lackawanna Mailing List
> http://EL-List.railfan.net/
> To Unsubscribe: http://Lists.Railfan.net/erielackunsub.html 


	The Erie Lackawanna Mailing List
	http://EL-List.railfan.net/
	To Unsubscribe: http://Lists.Railfan.net/erielackunsub.html

------------------------------