Hi, Everyone,
I'm new to this forum and I would appreciate, if I may please get, an answer to the classification light color(s) on the front and rear of C&O-CS's U30C engines, from the early 1970's, till CSX's buying them up?
Thank You,
Ralph
I am not at all familiar with the engines you name, but was the system used for their classification lights different from the standard system?--no classification light if the train is a scheduled train, white if it is an extra train (running without timetable authority), green if there is another section following on the same schedule,--and red on what is the rear of the train. I have seen two E's back-to-back running light, with red spectacles in the classification lights at what was the rear with respect to movement.
Johnny
Thank You, Johnny,
I have a model, of an actual GE U30C C&O-Chessie System, Road #3312 engine of the early 1970's, made by Lionel and I wanted to know of the classification light colors, front and rear, for authenticity.
The model has light green classification lights in the front and just blank-molded lights on the rear end, near the top, just below the roof.
I am unable to obtain info. on most web.sites, other than this one, and the few color photos. of the actual #3312 and other C&O-CS Engines, of the same time period, arent clear enough to distinguish the classification light colors of the front and rear.
I, just want it to be correct.
Train-O Thank You, Johnny, I have a model, of an actual GE U30C C&O-Chessie System, Road #3312 engine of the early 1970's, made by Lionel and I wanted to know of the classification light colors, front and rear, for authenticity. The model has light green classification lights in the front and just blank-molded lights on the rear end, near the top, just below the roof. I am unable to obtain info. on most web.sites, other than this one, and the few color photos. of the actual #3312 and other C&O-CS Engines, of the same time period, arent clear enough to distinguish the classification light colors of the front and rear. I, just want it to be correct. Ralph
Does anybody know of a practice of running two or more sections of a freight train? I have ridden passenger trains (excursion trains) that were operated as the second sections of freight trains.
DeggestyDoes anybody know of a practice of running two or more sections of a freight train?
Piecing together what I can remember hearing and reading when I was younger, I can speculate on the situation in Canada.
It was interesting to note the variations in the number of "numbered" (timetabled) freight trains from one Employee Timetable to the next. This of course was a reflection of the state of the economy at that point. If there was more freight to be moved, then they ran extras. Now, this worked fine from Calgary east and Kamloops, BC west, but you would have to split the trains to get them over the mountains.
Although I never thought to ask my father this specific question, based on a lot of other things he did say, I feel fairly certain that the "numbered" freights did run in sections. To get the extras over the mountains you simply ran more extras. Now there are variations in where the trains were split. I think the "numbered" freights would be set up as sections in Calgary. There was once extensive yard trackage at both Lake Louise and Banff, and a lot of switching was handled there. Plus, my father used to talk about every siding between Lake Louise and Banff, and east of Banff, being plugged during periodic seasonal rushes. It strikes me that even though places like Eldon and Castle Mountain had no customers, they had backtracks just to manage these rushes. All these trains would be reassembled at Kamloops.
One of those tidbit's of knowledge that will be lost if someone doesn't get on it and confirm it.
AgentKid
So shovel the coal, let this rattler roll.
"A Train is a Place Going Somewhere" CP Rail Public Timetable
"O. S. Irricana"
. . . __ . ______
Johnny and AgentKid,
I thank both of you for the detailed information, which is more than I had expected.
I certainly appreciate your kind consideration and help.
Sincerely,
AgentKid Although I never thought to ask my father this specific question, based on a lot of other things he did say, I feel fairly certain that the "numbered" freights did run in sections. To get the extras over the mountains you simply ran more extras. Now there are variations in where the trains were split. I think the "numbered" freights would be set up as sections in Calgary. There was once extensive yard trackage at both Lake Louise and Banff, and a lot of switching was handled there. Plus, my father used to talk about every siding between Lake Louise and Banff, and east of Banff, being plugged during periodic seasonal rushes. It strikes me that even though places like Eldon and Castle Mountain had no customers, they had backtracks just to manage these rushes. All these trains would be reassembled at Kamloops.
DeggestyAgentKid, was this same procedure followed eastbound?--split the trains into sections at Kamloops and reassemble at Calgary? It seems to me that this would keep the power distributed fairly evenly. You would need a few more cabooses, too.
Oh, I'm sorry I should have been more clear. Yes the situation was reversed. Even today Kamloops has a railway infrastructure out of proportion to a city its' size. And during the rushes freight consists would be run through Calgary and then broken up and stored at stations east of Calgary until the cars were needed.
As to the cabooses, there were many, and I have photos of cabooses on the back of first section's of passenger trains when a freight crew was called to get a passenger section back to their home terminal. Another thing I can't say for sure, but I suspect, is that there was a seniority thing about how the passenger sections were handled. Freight crews seemed to work the first sections with the passenger head end equipment like baggage and express cars and the regular passenger crews handled the coaches. In the early days they also did everything possible to avoid handling dining cars over the whole mountain section, as well. Put diners on at Vancouver and Calgary and turn them back to their home terminals when the schedule permitted. The Canadian was the first CPR passenger train to have run through diners from Montreal to Vancouver.
It wasn't just distributing the power, it was the kind of power. Mountain territory was the land of ten coupled steam power; Selkirk's, Santa Fe's and Decapod's as well as heavy Mikado's. East of Calgary and west of Kamloops you used Pacific's, Royal Hudson's and Mikado's There is always controversy about this, but the CPR's heavy shop for western Canada was the Ogden Shop at Calgary, and every engine on the lower BC mainland had to get back to Calgary for their periodic overhauls. The CPR believed that every serviceable engine should pull its weight, so there are photo's of the smallest, oldest power going over the mountains, and if it was serviceable it would be pulling or cut in on some kind of train. People can point and say such and such power was being used, but was it really just being run back and forth to Ogden.
I could go on but I have to get back to the rest of my life now.
One more point I should clear up. What I'm talking about in the above posts is the pre-diesel era. Once diesels arrived you could hook up as much power front, middle and back as required to get each numbered train over the line.
The Rock Island at times ran some schedules with multiple sections. I have a picture of a blue & while GP 38-2 with green signals being displayed from about Spring of 1977.
Just because a train was running as a section of a time table schedule dosen't always mean it was actually a second section of one symbol. The dispatchers at their convienence could run any train on any schedule, or as a section of a schedule that was handy. An example of this follows taken from a dispatcher's train sheet.
On Oct. 31, 1974, between the Quad Cities and Des Moines the time table had three schedules for westward trains. They were 59, 57, and 55. On this date 59A ran as No.59 on the time table schedule. No. 57's schedule had two sections this day. First 57 was 57B and Second 57 was 57A. In this case the first section of the symbol was ran second for some reason. No. 55's schedule also had two sections. First 55 was 43A's train and Second 55 was 55A's train.
IIRC from the article about TT & TO dispatching on the Katy many years ago, they changed rule books and the new one no longer had a provision to run sections of a schedule. To ease their workload, a dummy schedule was provided in the time table. It had no actual freight train tied to it, it just allowed the dispatcher to run a train without having to fix it up as an extra.
Jeff
Which reminds me of a situation my Dad used to complain about. The marketing people once had the operating people set up a train to serve a particular customer's need for a cross country service. Circumstances changed after only a few months and this particular train no longer needed to run. But that train number was kept on the timetable for years afterward in the hope that they could get enough new customers together to restart the service. So every day for years on one particular shift, one of the first things my Dad would have to do is issue an order abolishing Train ### for date so and so.
jeffhergertFirst 57 was 57B and Second 57 was 57A. In this case the first section of the symbol was ran second for some reason. No. 55's schedule also had two sections. First 55 was 43A's train and Second 55 was 55A's train.
Jeff, it is possible that 57B and 55B were not being run as far as 57A and 55A. Thus, when each of these reached the end of its run, 57A and 55A would conitinue on without having to stop to take classification signals down. This operation would be covering the orders issued to the crews. Then, the DS may have had an entirely different reason for the practice.
57B was called ahead of 57A out of Silvis, IL. I'm only guessing, but 57A may have been delayed getting out of Chicago or somewhere between there and Silvis, being passed by 57B enroute. All the trains I mentioned operated over the entire subivision, so I don't think taking down class lights, actually just turning off a switch in this case, would really matter.
For No 55, the first section was 43's train. I think it just happened to be called at the right time for it to be able to use 55's schedule. With 55 called close behind it, the dispatcher was able to use the time table schedule for both, running two sections.
By running multiple sections of a schedule, even if those trains aren't the same symbol, the dispatcher can possibly reduce the number of train orders that would otherwise be needed to fix up opposing extra trains. It seemed to have been a fairly common occurance when things fell together just right.
Going back to the good(?) old days, when Y-class articulateds ruled the N&W's Roanoke-Hagerstown route, there were six scheduled freights in each direction. During the height of the U-boat blitz along the Atlantic Coast, 1942, those trains ran in as many as ten sections.
Apparently the powers that be preferred green flags (on first through n minus 1 schedule number) to white flags (extra.) Back then, trains were required to fly appropriate flags by day, and the classification lamps would show the appropriate colors at night.
Chuck
To Everyone,
I want to thank all of you who have replied with valuable answers and information to my question.
I am glad for all of your kind consideration and help you gave me.
Your support is more than I had expected.
Again,
Thank You, All,
Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!
Get the Classic Trains twice-monthly newsletter