Southern
Pacific
9010
Reflections

Jim Evans Photo
|
Fresno
I used to
love seeing
those
engines, and the first time I
ever
spied one, we were transiting the Clinton Avenue overpass at the south
throat of Fresno Yard, probably in late 1964, I was twelve. Something
about all those windows, that busy little nose, and the white handrails
down the side just made the unit pop out and sear my memory. I thought
'What the heck is that??' It had a sort of dragonfly appearance to me,
those huge windows looking to me like a dragonfly's big eyes, I guess.
I
remember thinking it was especially clean, especially shiny, and
especially crisp in the details. Maybe it was the uniqueness, but
it just seemed to jump off the track, visually speaking.
Later,
that beautiful paint faded to a sadder, paler gray than I've ever seen
any other SP locomotive fade, and the red went to a dull tangerine.
Sort of common for German synthetic enamels of the time. (I think it
was synthetic.) And they looked so shabby, but strong. But nothing
seemed to share the sense of purpose and esthetics in the same
mix as they did when new. And 4000HP? Just flat 'Wow'.
I
heard many fans (most even) saying -- and still saying -- that the
K-M's were 'ugly'. I think that's a contextual thing. I thought they
were handsome, even beautiful.
And
if you lived
in
temperate Germany, the view out that cab
would certainly be second to none...
Robert J. Zenk 2008
K-M
Memories
In
the Spring of
1969, I climbed all over a trio of K-M hood units
waiting
for the torch at Associated Metals in Sacramento. It was a miserable,
rainy
day, and my Dad and I ran out of time and tools or we’d have brought
home
most of the nose that SP 9010 needs now!
I
wonder if there
was a little precognition that day?
The next Summer I went with my folks to visit Germany for the first
time.
A young American railfan with some German in his family bloodlines,
fresh
with the memories of that scrapyard visit, and of watching the K-Ms
reel
off the miles at 60MPH down the Valley.
And I was struck immediately by how fast and how frequently the
European
'goods' trains operated. With short ‘wagons’, buffers and drawhooks
giving
little slack, and great alignment on the rights-of-way, those trains
just
scooted. Macht schnell, all day and all night long.
I wondered why the K-Ms failed over here. I’d read all the stories
about
costs and breakdowns. But what about the simpler question?
Were the K-Ms just not good enough for the U.S.?
Howard Wise raised a fine question the other day that brought my young
railfan’s
line of thinking into the present. He asked ‘Did any other U.S.
railroad
go to greater lengths to customize a locomotive product to meet their
needs’?
When
you think of
heroic efforts to make a new locomotive technology
work,
many ‘home-grown’ solutions spring to mind from history. Whether it was
coal,
diesel, or oil-fired turbines with electric transmissions on the UP,
N&W,
or C&O; boilers-and-driving-rods on the Pennsy; or ‘watertube’
boilers
on the D&H -- it was still local conditions and domestic
mechanical
engineers
dictating the designs. The new thinking was in response to known local
conditions,
and those experiences were factored into the fundamental design by
people
who knew the territory.
At first glance, it seems that description fits the K-Ms to a ‘T’: born
in
Europe to U.S. specs, custom-built (in two varieties) to meet U.S.
operating
requirements.
But how ‘customized’ were they? Sure, they were huge even by U.S.
measure,
and looked like nothing else. But underneath, the change was little
more
than a massive boost in dimensions and outputs from European designs
that
were already on the shelf.
And that can’t have helped.
It’s worth noting that the ‘V300’ that K-M tested around Europe (and
which
got the eye of the SP) was a near-mechanical twin to the first cab
units
– but with 25% less horsepower. And that unit failed to gain acceptance
in
Europe, while even more modestly-powered 2000HP ‘V200’ versions were
racking
up the miles successfully -- and still live on to this day in active
service
around the world.
So the K-M product, and the hydraulic transmission, and even the
controversial
‘quick running’ Maybachs could work, and work well -- in the right
circumstances.
Maybe there were too many variables, and the SP ‘experiment’ should
have
only tested transmissions and not raised the bar on horsepower at the
same
time. Still, the K-Ms broke. So were they ‘no good’?
It makes as much sense to say that a batch of late-60’s Mercedes-Benz
diesel
taxicabs were no good as taxicabs because they failed miserably in New
York
City. The world experience for decades with Mercedes taxis, in crowded
big
cities, proves otherwise. But here in the U.S.? They were as doomed as
the
K-M's were, and maybe for similar reasons.
It’s what occurred to me nearly forty years ago in Germany, watching
how they run trains there.
Culture clash.
The SP was looking for pull. Tractive effort. The Germans said “yes, we
have
that.” And I’m sure they were typically proud of their 33%
tractive-effort
figures and high horsepower from a single unit. Make even more
horsepower?
Customize to the U.S.? Ja, we can do that. Aber natürlich.
Then the SP hung as much as they could tie onto a drawbar, treating the
new
units like Hannibal's elephants. And even the Rio Grande operations
weren’t
"fast and frequent", not compared to typical European operations. The
long,
heavy trains coupled to the U.S. K-Ms simply don't match the
conditions
of any other diesel-hydraulic success stories at that point in time.
A friend who hostled a K-M or two for the SP tells a story of a single
K-M
hood unit sent out one day with 13,000 tons tied to the rear drawbar.
That'd
be roughly 4,500 tons more than the unit was rated in the Special
Instructions
for that division. Someone obviously thought it could. And guess what?
It
couldn’t.
So strike one against K-Ms in America: they got beaten up as draft
horses
when they were possibly more suited to being trotters. Sure, K-M said
they
could do it. But the German cultural tendency at the time would have
made
it hard for K-M to say ‘No they can’t’.
Strike two? Well, that’d be maintenance, as in “they need too much”.
You can’t argue with SP's cost figures for the K-Ms vs. one of their
EMD
diesel-electrics. It’s also argued that a subsidized European workforce
provides
essentially ‘free’ labor. But what if the clash of cultures, acted out
in
steel and aluminum, caused the units to be not just unfamiliar, but
actually
hated?
That couldn’t have helped things.
There was a mindset at work: Germans didn't think that because
something
needs lubing and adjusting every week that it's a ‘difficult’ design --
they
took pride in the act of lubing. Which is not to say that American
workers
at the time had no pride. But we're talking about American pride, where
you
often heard someone brag, and rightfully so, about running their Dodge
truck
for 300,000 miles before changing the plugs. Put that truck next to a
German
car of the same era where a German would be changing the oil and filter
every
2,000 miles and setting his valve lash every 6,000 – with pride.
Ach du lieber.
But what about the burned valves from poor intake design, the
insufficient
cooling, the rough ride? Well, that was just a willful disregard on the
part
of the Germans, I think. They were not about to re-jigger the very
foundation
of their designs for this ‘export experiment’.
I think they were more than happy to design unique frames and carbodies
for
the U.S., but were not particularly engaged with the idea of rethinking
how
they made locomotives just to make us happy. After all, look at the
units:
didn’t we change everything and make it the way you asked?
It’s often said that the first six cab units were too
‘European-looking’.
It’s even a criticism that’s leveled at the design of the later hood
units.
But take a look at a true European K-M like the V300-class, and you’ll
see
that K-M went beyond the pale to make their units look ‘American’.
But it clearly wasn’t far enough.
So now it’s the end of summer 1970, and I’m back from Europe with my
head
full of the way they do things ‘over there’. And the K-Ms are gone from
the
Valley, and I’m sorting my few precious K-M slides while sitting in a
K-M
captain’s chair. I wish I’d gone to Europe sooner, or made a point to
chase
the SP K-Ms more often.
Where are they, now that I’m ready to understand them?
Back to Howard’s question: I think SP bit off a huge chunk to make them
work
well, and I'm afraid that by the time they figured out what they were
really
good for -- running fast and loose on the flat -- they'd been beat up
too
badly already, and the numbers were coming back against them with a
vengeance.
Like all the bold domestic railroad experiments in alternative power,
in
the end they moved technology forward but the subjects died in the
experiment.
The German locomotives may have had the hardest time making a go of it.
Because
it wasn't clean sheet of paper engineering, it was bending existing
practices
to fit. Bending them until they broke.
And since domestic experiments like the ‘Jawn Henry’ and the UP’s gas
turbines
were built to suit by Americans -- whereas the German locomotives were
modified
beyond recognition from their stock European counterparts -- I’d say
Howard,
I think you’re right.
Nobody took an existing locomotive design further from its roots than
the SP pushed and pulled its unique K-Ms.
Robert
J.
Zenk 2008
The most unusual locomotive I
had ever seen
As
for the K-M's, the first one I saw was in '65 or '66. I was
attending Modesto JC and working part time at a lumber company in the
afternoon. Trackside was blocked for a good 1/4 mile by the
lumber yard sheds
and I would usually position myself so I could see the trains go by at
one end or the other depending on where I was. I
could tell
if Alco's, F's or second generation EMD power was in the the consist
before I even saw the train, based on the sound. One day, I
heard a train coming that
was totally different. I raced to the East end of the yard
and approached the
main line and there was the most unusual locomotive I had ever seen, a
K-M. It was a single unit and seemed like it was lugging half
of
Roseville behind it.
Jerry
Larsen 2009
|