It looks to me as if that 'bunker on top' is the entire coal load on that tender. It seems kind of small, no? Is this incorrect on my part.
The CLiner might be the new dog in town but its future turns out to be far less reliable and its useful life span headed South real quick. It was no steam locomotive! Not even worthy of being in it's shadow.
A hostler at the Milwaukee Road’s engine terminal near 35th Street in Milwaukee uses a water crane to top off the tender of a steam locomotive. The Fairbanks-Morse diesel on the next track hints that steam is on borrowed time in this April 1951 photo.Linn H. Westcott photo
I'm sure I'm in error here. Likely the tender has a divider between the coal and the water. Usually you can sort of spot it but I cannot in this instance.
It's too bad we can't see the rest of that steam engine so we could make some kind of a call as to what type it is. The coal bunker looks like it's been built up a bit to increase it's capacity, and I'm sure there's a lot more coal down there, but as small as it still is I'm guessing we're looking at a yard switcher or possibly a local commuter train engine. Either one wouldn't need a large coal capacity.
The "C" in C-Liner might have stood for "classy," I've always liked the look of the C-Liners. Too bad they didn't work out in the long run.
Except that the diesel in question isn't a C-Liner. It's actually an Erie-built, the longer nose and the road number give it away.
Yes of course, you are correct. In some ways, that makes it even worse! Nice looking locomotive, big promotions with the Milwaukee Road for these locos but they did not last a third as long as that steam locomotive. Any thoughts of what that is. I like Firelocks idea of a commuter locomotive with that smallish bunker up top.
Probably a 10-wheeler 4-6-0. The high bunker suggests that this isn't a switcher, and Milwaukee had over 200 engines of this size. The Erie ran out its life in passenger service, so it's reasonable to assume that the engine terminal is for passenger engines. Milwaukee had lots of lines around Milwaukee for which a 4-6-0 would have been an ideal size. At least some engines in the 1100 series (the photo I found was of 1105, built 1925) had a tender identical to the one in the photo. Like many CMStP&P locomotives, built at West Milwaukee by the railroad.
Great analysis.. thanks. Almost unfathomable that a system as diverse and far reaching and of great importance as the Milwaukee Road is no more. Give your head a shake. Impossible.
CSSHEGEWISCH Except that the diesel in question isn't a C-Liner. It's actually an Erie-built, the longer nose and the road number give it away.
Whoops! But you know, those Erie-builts were lookers too.
Miningman Great analysis.. thanks. Almost unfathomable that a system as diverse and far reaching and of great importance as the Milwaukee Road is no more. Give your head a shake. Impossible.
CSSHEGEWISCH Miningman Great analysis.. thanks. Almost unfathomable that a system as diverse and far reaching and of great importance as the Milwaukee Road is no more. Give your head a shake. Impossible. Quite possible, especially when your major competition is the Hill lines.
And you construct a line that misses most major traffic sources in the areas it crosses, while also managing to throw in numerous 2%+ grades.
And you (almost deliberately) make operations more difficult and complex with two separate, relatively short (in the grand scheme of things) electrified districts.
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
Bah, Humbug!
During and post war the CMSt.P&P was a wonder to behold. Great backshops, did not run with pack, super dedicated employees. They were tricked and taken down the garden path by UP, betrayed even. Ditto for the C&NW with their endless waffling on marriage.
Then dishonest and criminal top management a la Stuart Saunders.
They had a golden opportunity with the SP connection who were overjoyed and eager to provide freight transfer. They were offered a sweet heart deal from GE for new Electrics and an opportunity to close the gap in the wire. Of course the crooked management was eyeing all that copper to be sold instead. In a comes around what goes around bolt of lightning Copper prices collapsed and the Oil Crisis started just as it was done. Same thing with the Louisville connection. Yeah, I know the line left much to be desired but upgrades could have occurred. Dollars spent back then would look like chump change today. Issue corporate bonds, raise the money from many individual investors looking at the long term. Instead they got shenanigans galore at head office.
When Soo Line got the Milwaukee they kept much of the Milwaukee trackage and routes and got rid of their own.
I know this is all simplified and much has been debated, many books written on the subject.
With the right guy at the helm they could easily have been a very successful survivor and perhaps today a part of CP, even CN, or possibly independent yet like KCS.
Oh I absolutely agree the Milwaukee was mismanaged, just like the Rock Island. They would always have been a more expensive line to operate but could have survived today, especially if de-regulation came sooner and allowed the shedding of many branchlines sooner.
In a merger with any parallel railroad through traffic would have soon been re-routed away from the MILW transcontinental, due to its inferior profile. Perhaps it would have been mothballed like Tennessee Pass instead of being ripped up.
KCS + MILW would have made a interesting combination.
CP (via Soo Line) actually did buy what was left of MILW during the 1980s after the final bankruptcy, by this time the transcon had already been ripped up. It was a failure, CP/SOO had exactly as much success profitably operating the lines as Milwaukee had, and most were sold off to shortlines like Wisconsin Central... ...which was acquired by CN!
Everyone gives Hunter Harrison credit for giving CN its own mainline from western Canada to Chicago but the idea long pre-dated his arrival. CP/SOO's bid for MILW only came after CN (through their GTW subsiduary) tried to buy Milwaukee FIRST. CP decided they could not allow CN to have their own line on this route, and started a bidding war. CNW then jumped in, the bidding got too rich and the penny-pinching Crown Corporation was forced to drop out. But the idea never died.
If the only coal they had was in a box on top of the tender, how would they get the coal into the cab to shovel into the firebox??
Steam engine tenders carried more water than coal, but I'm sure the front maybe 1/3 of the tender is divided out for coal, with the back 2/3 or so being water.
The collar just sticks up from the tender to keep coal from ending up all over the top. The water space surrounds the coal box, so you can't see whether the bottom of the box slopes or not. Sloping bottoms were common especially on hand-fired engines. Depending on the tender the coal space either goes all the way to the frame or sits above some water space. Having water at the front of the tender made some connections easier. The tender looks similar to the type that was "wrapped" to turn two 1911 4-6-0s into "North Woods Hiawatha" engines.
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