Trains.com

Classic Railroad Quiz (at least 50 years old).

661261 views
7259 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 4,402 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Monday, December 28, 2020 6:49 AM

The short stretch south of the CN Maritimes main line is all that remains of the original Central Vermont route to the Montreal area via Farnham QC. CV's line originally continued north past the Grand Trunk main to a dock on the St. Lawrence, but that was gone by 1909 when the line was electrified by the Montreal and Southern Counties as far as Marieville.  M&SC built its own line from Marieville to Granby, on another CV line.

The CV lines along with other Grand Trunk lines became part of CNH in 1923.  CV/CN steam operations continued until 1925, though M&SC handled local freight customers after about 1913. The CV line was abandoned south of a spot a couple of miles past Marieville, which was electrified so the M&SC could provide service.

In 1951 CN replaced the M&SC trains east of Marieville with diesel-hauled trains, even buying FM-design H-12-46 engines specifically for the service.  M&SC trains continued to operate to Marieville until 1955.

CN dropped the diesel-hauled passenger trains in 1960.  The line remained in use for freight until the 1970s.  Meanwhile the Rouses Point sub some miles to the west was in the path of the Rte 132 freeway, so CN built a connecting track from Richfield Park to La Prairie.  This had the added advantage of eliminating a backup move for Rouses Point sub freight trains.

Amtrak's Adirondack uses the line now when not suspended.  The same route was used by the Montrealer (and Washingtonian) prior to 1995.

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 17,517 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Monday, December 28, 2020 12:48 PM

The other CV-B&M trains that used thr route  were the New Englander to Boston and the Ambassador to Grand Central in New York, New Haven south of Spromgfield. MA.

A grouip of Massachusetts trolley executives and their friends chartered a trolley parlor car for a trip over the interconnecting trolley lines to New York City from Boston.  They had planned to the same car for the entire trip.

But in New Haven they changed to Connecticut Co. 500, preserv3ed in operatuing condition at Branford, www.shorelinetroley.org.

Why did they change equipment?

 

Why did they not ride downtown, further souith than the loop under the 2nd and 3rd Avenue elevated yard near the 129th Street Carhouse?   (That's easy, the first question is the real question.)

And tell us all you know about the excursion. 

 

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 4,402 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Monday, December 28, 2020 3:33 PM

daveklepper
The other CV-B&M trains that used thr route were the New Englander to Boston and the Ambassador to Grand Central in New York, New Haven south of Spromgfield. MA.

Actually, the Autoroute change was made after the "real" CV/CN trains were discontinued.  The Rouses Point sub formerly came off the Victoria Bridge on a fairly tight curve before heading straight south.  The new path via the ex-CV line is operationally better. Removing the former Rouses Point sub approach also allowed CN to build a bypass lift bridge over the canal, allowing operation over the bridge regardless of the presence of ocean-going freighters.

CN's Southwark yard is reached at Cannon Jct, formerly M&SC Jct.

 

The only Boston-New York trip I can find details on without digging too hard involved Massachusetts newspapermen, not streetcar execs from Boston to New Rochelle and a connection with the NYW&B to New York City.  On THAT trip it was necessary for the Shore Line Electric to reduce voltage from 1200 to 600 for about 45 miles (an easy task as "1200 volt" substations had two 600 volt rotary converters in series).  Car used was Bay State 4182, a Laconia-built semi-convertible identical to 4175, under restoration at Seashore https://collection.trolleymuseum.org/browse.php?id=04175SMA 

This isn't intended to directly answer Dave's question... I'll keep looking.

 

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 17,517 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Tuesday, December 29, 2020 2:50 PM

I did not know about the Newespaper peoples' trip, and would be inyeresyed in learning more about it.  The connection to Branford's 500 put be on to the Massachuseyys trolleymen's trip.  Don't rememner the car used Biostton - New Haven.  May have been the Worcester Tech's Rngineering car or a parlor from the Eorcester - Springfield intyerurban.

The trolleymen took two days, with overrnighy in Nrer Haven, if my memory is correct/  Did the newspap[ermen complrtr the trip in one day?  Iy was possible to do the trip in one day on regolar cars, possibly reqiring about a dozen changes.

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 4,402 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Wednesday, December 30, 2020 7:17 AM

I think the Newspapermen did it in about 22 hours.  Bay State 4182 would have been fairly breezy even with all of the windows closed.  The seats were at best rattan-covered, though at least some of the series had wooden seats.

I would think the use of ConnCo 500 was due to the Mellon family wanting to buy more Mass. and R.I. electric railways.  ConnCo cars did use full railroad size flanges so that might have been the real reason.  Obviously ran out of overhead wire in New York City...

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 17,517 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Wednesday, December 30, 2020 7:31 AM

That is not the reason for the change of cars in New Haven.

They would have gotten as far as Norwalk, but the car they started out in, a big cleristory-roof car, would have had a very specific probkwem at one point south of there.

Did the 22 hours include the NYW&B part?

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 16,020 posts
Posted by Overmod on Wednesday, December 30, 2020 11:11 AM

daveklepper
Did the 22 hours include the NYW&B part?

Probably about 3 hours of it -- subjectively at least -- were on the connecting subway ride butt-ending with the NYW&B... Big Smile

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 4,402 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Wednesday, December 30, 2020 11:52 AM

The article didn't say how the 22 hours were spent.  It may have included only the trolley portion.  The run used Bay State, Rhode Island Company, Shore Line Electric, Connco and New York & Stamford tracks.

So...a vertical clearance problem under a bridge (New Haven RR?) Big cars also had problems with tight curves, especially when the overhang went past the curb.

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 17,517 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Wednesday, December 30, 2020 12:27 PM

Vertical clearance under a bridge is xcorrect.

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 4,402 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Friday, January 1, 2021 6:56 AM

A little more digging on the 1915 trip suggest they brought a large amount of food and drink, and some of the transverse seets were removed and replaced with wicker lounge chairs. The group took about 9 1/2 hors from Boston to New London, and a little over 10 from New London to New Rochelle, staing in a hotel in New London.

This large interurban system, made up from several smaller systems, couldn't actually enter the city in its corporate name for two reasons, requiring a transfer of all passengers entering the city itself.  Name the interurban system and both reasons its cars couldn't enter the city.

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 4,402 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Thursday, January 7, 2021 7:33 AM

The interurban's best known cars were built not far from the end of its line just outside of its namesake city.

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 12,359 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Thursday, January 7, 2021 10:14 AM

The cars were the "Red Devils" and the interurban was the Cincinnati & Lake Erie.  The interurban couldn't enter Cincinnati because of the two-wire overhead used by the Cincinnati street railway system..

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 4,402 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Thursday, January 7, 2021 10:43 AM

In addition to the two wire overhead there was another problem that was also found in other Ohio cities...

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 17,517 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Thursday, January 7, 2021 2:20 PM

The Cincinnati and  Lake Erie and its predicessors were standard guage, but the Cincinnati city system was broad gauge.

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 4,402 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Thursday, January 7, 2021 4:10 PM

daveklepper

The Cincinnati and  Lake Erie and its predicessors were standard guage, but the Cincinnati city system was broad gauge.

 

Cincinnati and Columbus at least were "Pennsylvania Broad Gauge" 5' 2 1/2".  Columbus had dual-gauge track where routes were shared between city cars and interurbans. The local carbuilder Cincinnati Car Co. had dual-gauge test track sections with dual overhead.

You guys split the answer. 

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 17,517 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Friday, January 8, 2021 6:43 AM

Happy to have CSS ask the next question.  If he is reluctant to come with on e, I'll do my best.

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 12,359 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Friday, January 8, 2021 1:57 PM

North Shore Line operated a single city streetcar route in Milwaukee.  What was an unusual characteristic of this operation?

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 16,020 posts
Posted by Overmod on Friday, January 8, 2021 3:27 PM

CSSHEGEWISCH
What was an unusual characteristic of this operation?

That all the 90mph trains ran over it to get downtown?

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 12,359 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Saturday, January 9, 2021 10:18 AM

Not quite.  City cars and interurban trains operated by the same operator and on the same tracks was hardly unusual.  Besides, North Shore's city cars operated on some trackage that the interurban trains did not use.

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 17,517 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Saturday, January 9, 2021 12:07 PM

Both the single-truck Birneys that migrated to the line when the double-truck safety cars that were normal were required to boost the Waukeegan - Great  lakes N . B. setvice had special floor construction for better heat insulation against cold wearther.  All runs carried a complement of flags to indicate runnung extra or second section following, etc.  The line gave and received transfers to and from only one of the routes of the main transit system, the one line that had been the local operation of the interurban north to Sheborgan.

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 4,402 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Saturday, January 9, 2021 1:01 PM

Chicago & Milwaukee Electric (the official name of the CNS&M's street trackage) owned three blocks of track on Wells St. that was also used by The Milwaukee Electric Railway & Light Co. (TMERL).  TMERL cars on Wells lasted several years longer than C&ME's, but C&ME owned the track to the end.

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 12,359 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Sunday, January 10, 2021 10:11 AM

Daveklepper has the answer.  It's kind of hard to imagine transfers being issued by a transit operation with only one line.

Take it away, Dave.

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 17,517 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Sunday, January 10, 2021 11:59 AM

The answer to this question was the answer to another question about this particular rail line.  From aboout 1952 to 1957, on the same tracks, five different forms of motive power were used and represented five of the six (now or were) in wide-apread use in North America.  Excluded are animal power, sails, graviy, cable.

The line is still in used, intesively, but not with five forms of motive power.

Which line, which trains?

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 17,517 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Sunday, January 10, 2021 10:30 PM

The owner of the line today was neither the owner nor the other user in the 1950s, nor was it the predicessor of the single user and owner today,  But equipment of the predicessor and  crews.......

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 17,517 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Monday, January 11, 2021 3:15 AM

But the equipment and train-crews of the predicessor of the present owner were n these tracks very frequentty.

The period showed both passenger and freight trains on this line, but today, only passnger with only passenger.

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 4,402 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Monday, January 11, 2021 6:40 AM

PRR east of Newark?  Steam (PRR to Jersey City, LV from Manhattan Transfer), Diesel (ditto), Third rail 600VDC (H&M) and Electric (PRR, both MU and Loco-hauled).  I guess PATH works as a successor to H&M, and Amtrak to PRR.

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 17,517 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Monday, January 11, 2021 12:24 PM

Amtrack does not run to Jersey Citu, so PATH, the Successor to H&M, is now exclusive owner and user.  Although H&M (and compatible PRR) equipment, as well as crews, used the line, they were PRR trains west of Journal Squaew, Jersey City.

Your question,

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 4,402 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Monday, January 11, 2021 12:39 PM

In the "classic" electric era, many locomotives were built by the two main running gear/electric partnerships, Alco/GE and Baldwin/Westinghouse.  In the case of one electrification, all of the original locomotives were built by one of the running gear firms and equipped by the "wrong" electrical firm.  Railroad and builder/electical.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 16,020 posts
Posted by Overmod on Monday, January 11, 2021 12:55 PM

You do know the West Valley had a Baldwin with GE electrical gear in 1925...

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 4,402 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Monday, January 11, 2021 6:51 PM

This was a major steam railroad electrification...Later units were all from one builder.

SUBSCRIBER & MEMBER LOGIN

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

FREE NEWSLETTER SIGNUP

Get the Classic Trains twice-monthly newsletter