MTH New York Central Fairbanks-Morse H10-44 #9110

Thank you MELGAR!  We appreciate your business very much.

Sharp engine Mel.  I may have to return the favor and pull out my credit card.....😎😎

Bob

I have one of these as well. I run it with my Legacy handheld via a Lionel TPC unit.

With the stall voltage at 5.5v it will crawl as good as any command control diesel and the sounds are excellent.

Nice looking engine…

Mel, was the maintainence issue the reason it wasn’t a big seller……or, was it hopeless for Fairbanks Morse because EMD and ALCO had such a big lead in the market and crushed them?

Peter

@Putnam Division posted:

Nice looking engine…

Mel, was the maintainence issue the reason it wasn’t a big seller……or, was it hopeless for Fairbanks Morse because EMD and ALCO had such a big lead in the market and crushed them?

Peter

Both the Fairbanks-Morse maintenance issue and the wartime production of EMD diesels eventually eliminated the other builders from the marketplace. Then GE entered the market.

The opposed-piston engine had two crankshafts - one at the bottom of the engine and another at the top. The crankshaft is probably the most expensive engine part to manufacture - and the FM engine had two. The entire engine had to be disassembled to replace the FM lower crankshaft. Expensive again and labor intensive. Due to the expense, opposed-piston engines in some FM locomotives were replaced by EMD 567 engines when overhaul became necessary.

During World War 2, the War Production Board assigned GM's Electro-Motive Division to the production of diesel locomotives (mostly FT types) while the other locomotive builders (Alco, Baldwin, Lima) were designated to continue building steam engines. By the end of the war, EMD had a five-year advantage in building and marketing diesel locomotives, and the other manufacturers were unable to overcome EMD's lead.

MELGAR

@MELGAR posted:

Both the Fairbanks-Morse maintenance issue and the wartime production of EMD diesels eventually eliminated the other builders from the marketplace. Then GE entered the market.

The opposed-piston engine had two crankshafts - one at the bottom of the engine and another at the top. The crankshaft is probably the most expensive engine part to manufacture - and the FM engine had two. The entire engine had to be disassembled to replace the FM lower crankshaft. Expensive again and labor intensive. Due to the expense, opposed-piston engines in some FM locomotives were replaced by EMD 567 engines when overhaul became necessary.

During World War 2, the War Production Board assigned GM's Electro-Motive Division to the production of diesel locomotives (mostly FT types) while the other locomotive builders (Alco, Baldwin, Lima) were designated to continue building steam engines. By the end of the war, EMD had a five-year advantage in building and marketing diesel locomotives, and the other manufacturers were unable to overcome EMD's lead.

MELGAR

Thank you so much!

Peter

@MELGAR posted:

Both the Fairbanks-Morse maintenance issue and the wartime production of EMD diesels eventually eliminated the other builders from the marketplace. Then GE entered the market.

The opposed-piston engine had two crankshafts - one at the bottom of the engine and another at the top. The crankshaft is probably the most expensive engine part to manufacture - and the FM engine had two. The entire engine had to be disassembled to replace the FM lower crankshaft. Expensive again and labor intensive. Due to the expense, opposed-piston engines in some FM locomotives were replaced by EMD 567 engines when overhaul became necessary.

During World War 2, the War Production Board assigned GM's Electro-Motive Division to the production of diesel locomotives (mostly FT types) while the other locomotive builders (Alco, Baldwin, Lima) were designated to continue building steam engines. By the end of the war, EMD had a five-year advantage in building and marketing diesel locomotives, and the other manufacturers were unable to overcome EMD's lead.

MELGAR

MELGAR if I recall correctly weren't the FM Diesel engines actually Marine engines.

Ron

@PRRronbh posted:

MELGAR if I recall correctly weren't the FM Diesel engines actually Marine engines.

Ron

Ron,

Correct.

Fairbanks-Morse opposed-piston engines were used in US Navy submarines during World War 2.

MELGAR

A slightly older H10-44:

It weighs in at a little over 13 pounds.

Dave,

Yours is supposed to be a model of an FM H20-44.    That was model FM designated as a Road Switcher.   It had a 2000 HP prime mover and trucks designed for higher road speeds.

I think (and I could be wrong) the war production board during WWII allowed Alco and Baldwin build switchers but not Road Freighters.    I don't think any of them was supposed to build passenger engines.

So EMD did get a major advantage by having a 5 year start to work out the bugs and weaknesses of their road engines while the competition were limited to low speed switchers.

Dave, that is some door stop you have!

@prrjim posted:

Dave,

I think (and I could be wrong) the war production board during WWII allowed Alco and Baldwin build switchers but not Road Freighters.    I don't think any of them was supposed to build passenger engines.

So EMD did get a major advantage by having a 5 year start to work out the bugs and weaknesses of their road engines while the competition were limited to low speed switchers.

For domestic railroad customers, Alco could offer only yard switchers, but they also built 14 RS-1 road switchers that were directed to the Trans-Iranian Railroad and used to supply Russia. Alco also built 30 DL-109 locomotives for the New Haven Railroad, which used them for passenger service during daytime and freight service at night.

Baldwin built yard switchers because that was the only diesel product they had available for sale.

MELGAR

@MELGAR posted:

Ron,

Correct.

Fairbanks-Morse opposed-piston engines were used in US Navy submarines during World War 2.

MELGAR

Wonder if the Navy had as much trouble with these engines as the railroads did?

@Mark V. Spadaro posted:

Wonder if the Navy had as much trouble with these engines as the railroads did?

No. They did not. From what I've read they were reliable in marine applications but the railroad environment was more demanding.

MELGAR

Kinda makes sense. Boats have a cruising speed, maintaining a steady state, as opposed to revs going up and down as the diesel notches change.

@MELGAR posted:

New York Central Fairbanks-Morse H10-44 diesel switcher #9110 is an MTH Railking model (30-21010-1 with PS3) that I purchased from Forum sponsor JR Junction Train and Hobby of Syracuse, New York.

I inspected the model carefully and found absolutely no defects in packaging, design, assembly or its lightning-stripe paint scheme. In my opinion, the model is perfect, and this manufacturing quality is typical of MTH Railking diesels that I’ve bought recently.

Although other locomotive builders made high-hood diesels, the appearance of the Fairbanks-Morse version is distinctive.     MELGAR

Good info on the real engine Melgar.

Good looking NYC H10-44 .   I don't have one of these but after seeing your pics and videos .......I'll have to store this in my GRAY MATTER  memory banks until I build up my cash reserves.

@MELGAR posted:

New York Central Fairbanks-Morse H10-44 diesel switcher #9110 is an MTH Railking model (30-21010-1 with PS3) that I purchased from Forum sponsor JR Junction Train and Hobby of Syracuse, New York.

I inspected the model carefully and found absolutely no defects in packaging, design, assembly or its lightning-stripe paint scheme. In my opinion, the model is perfect, and this manufacturing quality is typical of MTH Railking diesels that I’ve bought recently.

Although other locomotive builders made high-hood diesels, the appearance of the Fairbanks-Morse version is distinctive.

New York Central #9110 was the last of five NYC Class DES-14c locomotives. It was built in 1950 and had a 6-cylinder opposed-piston engine that developed 1000 horsepower at 800 RPM with 2 pistons in each cylinder – a design that was used in US Navy submarines during World War 2. The engine had two crankshafts, was expensive to maintain, and very tall; hence the high-hood of the H10-44. Its starting tractive effort was 72,000 pounds and 34,000 pounds at 9 miles-per-hour. Maximum speed was 60 miles-per-hour and 195 units were built between 1944 and 1950. These locomotives are known to have been in use at NYC’s Collinwood Yard in Cleveland, Ohio.

The photos show the engine on my 12’-by-8’ layout and the videos show its first run through the truss bridge at 11.5 scale miles-per-hour in conventional operation.

MELGAR

MELGAR , I waited till I found some images to reply.

The fall of 1995 bought my first MTH Premier engine.  Up to then had 10 or 12 Rail King a GG1 the rest streamline steamers.

So my first Premier in95 was the PRR FM H10-44 (20-2075).  It was conventional with horn.  Had intention to upgrade to PS  with one of the upgrade kits.  Then I saw forum member Barry Broskowitz posted a MTH RK "SCALE" Pittsburgh & West Virginia FM H10-44 30-2347-1 PS2 from 4/2003 for sale.  Since this is scale should be the same..

I popped the cabs and they did interchange!  But, my original Premier H10-44 had three "steel" weights.

I made detailed sketches of the hole pattern with dimensions.  Tok 32 close up pictures.  So since you made me think of this with your purchase hopefully I will get to it before my time runs out.  There is a vey noticeable difference in the fell of the weighted engine.

Ron

@MELGAR posted:

Ron,

That's interesting. As I understand it, you have a Premier H10-44 from 1995 with just a horn and a Railking Scale H10-44 with PS2 from 2003 - and the Premier version has three steel weights that the Railking version does not. Is that correct?

I haven't removed the shell from my NYC H10-44 so I don't know if it has weights or not. I would be interested in seeing pictures comparing both of your models. I'm wondering whether the weights in your Premier version might have been installed by a previous owner. Do the weights look like MTH built them into the Premier model or were they a modification?

MELGAR

The first run of the MTH H10-44 was in the Premier line, and they had added weights from the factory. Later when the tooling was moved to the Rail King line the weights were no longer added, but the locomotive gained a smoke unit.

Most early MTH diesel and steam locomotives had added weights. Early Alco PAs had a weight near each truck, and the first run Premier ATSF 2900 class Northerns had a weight over the front two drivers. The weights are absent on later runs from around the year 2000 and later. They probably didn't add much more pulling power and were eliminated.

@MELGAR posted:

Ron,

That's interesting. As I understand it, you have a Premier H10-44 from 1995 with just a horn and a Railking Scale H10-44 with PS2 from 2003 - and the Premier version has three steel weights that the Railking version does not. Is that correct?

I haven't removed the shell from my NYC H10-44 so I don't know if it has weights or not. I would be interested in seeing pictures comparing both of your models. I'm wondering whether the weights in your Premier version might have been installed by a previous owner. Do the weights look like MTH built them into the Premier model or were they a modification?

MELGAR

MELGAR you have it correct.  

I bought my H10-44 new Fall 1995 right after it was delivered from local dealer.

Went into panic mode this morning when the vial containing the weights was NOT were I recall I put it!!  Surged around many tool boxes and containers and found them!

Here are the three weights with screws, layout skeptic and vial.  They weigh just over 9 3/4 ops.

Ron

@RickO posted:

I have one of these as well. I run it with my Legacy handheld via a Lionel TPC unit.

With the stall voltage at 5.5v it will crawl as good as any command control diesel and the sounds are excellent.

Hey RickO,

I just received this engine as a gift and am having some difficultly getting then engine set up with my Legacy Remote. I noticed from your previous post that you are running this engine with a Legacy Handheld remote. For some reason I am experiencing a great level of difficulty with this and cannot program my engine and remote. I was wondering if you had any tips on programing and running this engine with the Legacy Control system. Thanks in advance.

@Frankiep89 posted:

Hey RickO,

I just received this engine as a gift and am having some difficultly getting then engine set up with my Legacy Remote. I noticed from your previous post that you are running this engine with a Legacy Handheld remote. For some reason I am experiencing a great level of difficulty with this and cannot program my engine and remote. I was wondering if you had any tips on programing and running this engine with the Legacy Control system. Thanks in advance.

Edit from my previous post. I misunderstood and mistakenly thought you had a Lionel TMCC engine. Much of this topic is about an MTH PS3 engine being run conventional (varying track voltage) mode. In order to run it from a CAB2 remote- you would have to have a variable track power supply compatible with your Legacy system and CAB2 remote. Specifically a TMCC Track Power Controller, Legacy Powermaster, or an TMCC/Legacy controlled transformer like the ZW-L. I've highlighted the KEY component in the below quote.

@RickO posted:

I have one of these as well. I run it with my Legacy handheld via a Lionel TPC unit.

This is the TPC Track Power Controller http://www.lionel.com/products...ler-tpc-400-6-14179/

The modern version is known as the Legacy Powermaster http://www.lionel.com/products...powermaster-6-37146/

Again, key there is an MTH engine is typically only controlled using conventional operation mode (varying track power and whistle and bell DC offsets) when talking about doing it from Lionel control systems.

Lionel remotes cannot control or convert to MTH DCS commands (revolves around licensing and technical details of the command format).

MTH DCS remotes+TIU+cabling+TMCC/Legacy base can convert and run TMCC/Legacy commands.

The "workaround" is with a TMCC/Legacy controlled power supply (TPC, Legacy Powermaster, ZW-L), a Lionel (example CAB2) remote commands the power control to vary the track voltage- resulting in conventional control of an MTH engine. Then Bell and Whistle/Horn sequences can also sometimes activate the conventional operation advanced modes of MTH engines (example, PFA, fire couplers).

Point being, are not programming an MTH engine ID into a Lionel remote- you are at best controlling a track voltage and that would be engine independent.

@Frankiep89 posted:

Hey RickO,

I just received this engine as a gift and am having some difficultly getting then engine set up with my Legacy Remote. I noticed from your previous post that you are running this engine with a Legacy Handheld remote. For some reason I am experiencing a great level of difficulty with this and cannot program my engine and remote. I was wondering if you had any tips on programing and running this engine with the Legacy Control system. Thanks in advance.

As Vernon says, you'll need either the older Lionel TPC unit which is what I have, or the newer most likely less expensive , Legacy powermaster.

Yes, its conventional control. However, you can operate main functions like Horn, whistle, bell and electro- couplers via their corresponding buttons on the Legacy remote. Additionally some of the crewtalk can be accessed withAUX-1 and specific numeric keypad presses.

The MTH electronics, with its incorporated BCR? allows direction changes without lights or sound loss resulting in a "command like" operation that is superior to transformer control because you still have remote capability as I mentioned above.

I'm a fan of Legacy steam sounds but IMO, prefer MTH diesel sounds. Especially when it comes to early diesels like Alcos and this FM.  I think there are some TMCC diesels that sound much better than the Legacy remakes , but now I'm rambling.

Back to the topic at hand. Heres the MTH FM H10-44 being operated conventionally with the Legacy handheld using the Lionel Track Power Controller.

Horn, whistle, bell, couplers, all being activated with the legacy remote:

( If your interested. Theres "amaturish" video on my youtube channel discussing how some of the PS 3 features are activated with a Railking Pennsylvania RS1}

Wow, that's a beautiful video of a beautiful engine. Thank you for all of the insight pertaining to the MTH engine. This is my fist MTH that I ever purchased, it was a gift. Clearly I am not up to speed with the difference between the Lionel and MTH and their diesel engines. I will be purchasing the Legacy Powermaster so I can enjoy all the features of this new engine. Thank you for all your insight and showing off your beautiful layout.

@Vernon Barry posted:

Edit from my previous post. I misunderstood and mistakenly thought you had a Lionel TMCC engine. Much of this topic is about an MTH PS3 engine being run conventional (varying track voltage) mode. In order to run it from a CAB2 remote- you would have to have a variable track power supply compatible with your Legacy system and CAB2 remote. Specifically a TMCC Track Power Controller, Legacy Powermaster, or an TMCC/Legacy controlled transformer like the ZW-L. I've highlighted the KEY component in the below quote.

This is the TPC Track Power Controller http://www.lionel.com/products...ler-tpc-400-6-14179/

The modern version is known as the Legacy Powermaster http://www.lionel.com/products...powermaster-6-37146/

Again, key there is an MTH engine is typically only controlled using conventional operation mode (varying track power and whistle and bell DC offsets) when talking about doing it from Lionel control systems.

Lionel remotes cannot control or convert to MTH DCS commands (revolves around licensing and technical details of the command format).

MTH DCS remotes+TIU+cabling+TMCC/Legacy base can convert and run TMCC/Legacy commands.

The "workaround" is with a TMCC/Legacy controlled power supply (TPC, Legacy Powermaster, ZW-L), a Lionel (example CAB2) remote commands the power control to vary the track voltage- resulting in conventional control of an MTH engine. Then Bell and Whistle/Horn sequences can also sometimes activate the conventional operation advanced modes of MTH engines (example, PFA, fire couplers).

Point being, are not programming an MTH engine ID into a Lionel remote- you are at best controlling a track voltage and that would be engine independent.

Thank you for all the information. I definetly will be purchasing the Legacy Powermaster to take full advantage of some of the features of this engine.