Classic Railroad Quiz (at least 50 years old).

632090 views
6876 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 3,975 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Saturday, April 4, 2020 6:18 PM

Most if not all of the Dale cars were assigned to SP, primarily for the Lark, though some ran in the Sunset.

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 10,712 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Saturday, April 4, 2020 5:45 PM

According to Kratville's Passenger Car Catalog, p. 11, plan 2412H had 4 private washrooms (each displaced section was made into two washrooms), giving the section immediately next to one exclusive use of it. These sections were described as "private sections."

Yes, four cars were named for men well-known in the South (Henry W. Grady, John T. Morgan, John M. Morehead, and John Slidell). Equipment description of the Crescent thereafter described them as "14 sections"--and it took all four to run on that train (two nights each way). I do not doubt that Pullman charged a little more for these.

At one time later, the L&N described a car on a one night train as having a 14 section car, and they were no  longer listed in the Crescent's equipment.

The other cars so altered were given names in a Dale-- series; there is no mention of what roads they were used on.

You did get the general idea.

Johnny

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 3,975 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Saturday, April 4, 2020 3:14 PM

Overmod

We had this question not too long ago, didn't we?

 

We did.  Those were the plan 2412H cars rebuilt for the Lark and various Southern Railway trains.  Four enclosed sections (two each sharing a bathroom) replaced six normal sections.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 10,499 posts
Posted by Overmod on Saturday, April 4, 2020 3:10 PM

We had this question not too long ago, didn't we?  Bathrooms?

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 10,712 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Saturday, April 4, 2020 1:06 PM

In 1931-32, Pullman rebuilt several 16 section cars into 14 section cars. What was unique about these cars? What was done with the space formerly occupied by two of the sections? (the other sections were not changed). How were the cars then described?

 

Johnny

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 3,975 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Saturday, April 4, 2020 11:08 AM

And the RI served Memphis, too.  Your question.

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 10,712 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Saturday, April 4, 2020 8:06 AM

The CGW, Milw, CB&Q, and RI reached from Chicago to the Twin Cities, Omaha, and Kansas City.

The CB&Q and the RI also served St. Louis.

Johnny

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 3,975 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Saturday, April 4, 2020 6:04 AM

By my count, in 1950 four railroad systems reached from Chicago to the Twin Cities, Omaha and Kansas City.  Two of those also served St. Louis. List the four and the two.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 10,499 posts
Posted by Overmod on Thursday, April 2, 2020 12:17 PM

rcdrye
The picture you have there is from 1949, at least according to the web site where it was posted.

Shows how far you can trust soi-disant serious preservationists!  (As I understand it, they let this one be scrapped, btw...)

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 3,975 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Thursday, April 2, 2020 9:30 AM

The picture you have there is from 1949, at least according to the web site where it was posted.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 10,499 posts
Posted by Overmod on Thursday, April 2, 2020 8:56 AM

2-cylinder, quartered, reciprocating steam locomotives, with Walschaerts valve gear, but not requiring the complexity of the N&W 'automatic' M2s to suit them for remote operation...

rcdrye has the answer I was looking for, although my understanding ... such as it is ... was that the experiments were in the '50s rather than the '40s.  It would be interesting to have more precise technical details.

(Courtesy of RyPN)

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 3,975 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Thursday, April 2, 2020 6:06 AM

Pennsylvania Power and Light had two fireless steam locomotives at plants in Pennsylvania with radio remote control, apparently tried inthe late 1940s.  The remote control system was designed by Union Switch & Signal.  Since the controls were originally designed for diesels, getting them set right seems to have been a challenge - US&S employees said that "an excessive amount of profanity" was used during the trials.

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 15,861 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Thursday, April 2, 2020 12:20 AM

By remote control, only off the train, or does from elsewhere in the train count?

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 15,861 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Wednesday, April 1, 2020 11:50 PM

By reciprocating do you mean steam reciprocating?  Because diesel engines, the prime movers, are also reciprocating.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 10,499 posts
Posted by Overmod on Wednesday, April 1, 2020 11:58 AM

In the late Fifties a company experimented with radio remote control of reciprocating locomotives, for a specific purpose.  Name the company and the anticipated reason.  Extra points for the type of diesel also 'experimented with' at the time...

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 15,861 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Tuesday, March 31, 2020 2:51 AM

Still waiting for your question, Overmod.

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 3,975 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Thursday, March 26, 2020 6:30 PM

That's it! 1712 is at the Connecticut Fire Museum, which shares the grounds of the Connecticut Trolley Museum at Warehouse Point, Connecticut. The initial testing was done at Warehouse Point, with poor results as noted.  It was out on the road at the Cabin Fever event there in February, but not on the rails.

The Connecticut Co. apparently started this project with GM and Fairmont with the cooperation of the New Haven, but without talking to the unions, at the time the BLE, BLF, and UTU.  Since Ct. Co. drivers were represented by a non-rail union, the full crew requirement may have been a gambit to have rail union members get the driver jobs.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 10,499 posts
Posted by Overmod on Thursday, March 26, 2020 3:52 PM

Your correct answer, complete with the seven-man crew, is the '67 Fairmont Conversion (remember Fairport Convention?) built for my beloved Connecticut Company for use in Hartford (more specifically from Rockville/Vernon right into city center).

You'd think these guys would have learned from the Evans Auto-Railer that these things need primary suspension that both tracks and guides well ... but secondary that gives the net 'resultant' of pneumatic tires and well-damped air-bag suspension at the front of the bus.  

Union attitude like this, over issues of weight, torpedoed the SPV2000 before it even got much of a fair chance to show what it could do.  Much of the wackiness was solved with eight-wheel drive...

Here's your survivor, #1712

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 15,861 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Thursday, March 26, 2020 1:10 PM

can you answer my question, still a business or a gov. operation?

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 3,975 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Thursday, March 26, 2020 10:17 AM

Wow, I did not see that coming.  The Red Arrow tests revealed the same ride problems that the ones I was looking for had, but didn't involve a class I with a cranky union.  I'll hold this 'til later today, and if nobody comes up with (my) correct answer, you win.  For what it's worth, one of the rail-buses is still alive and well, complete with rail wheels.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 10,499 posts
Posted by Overmod on Thursday, March 26, 2020 9:18 AM

This'll be the Red Arrow experiments in Philadelphia, between 1967 and 1968.  See here for more detail.

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 15,861 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Thursday, March 26, 2020 6:19 AM

Was this still a business or was it a municipally-, state-. or other local authority-owned bus system?

 

Japan's railways are again experimenting with this concept for lines on Hokaido Islalnd, where some passenger routes are still operated with less than 500 riders per day.

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 3,975 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Monday, March 23, 2020 4:08 PM

This former street railway/interurban bus company equipped six transit buses with hi-rail gear in the late 1960s to test the concept of using its former parent's rails to bypass rush hour highway traffic.  The intent was to use city streets when the city was reached.  Testing showed that the ride quality would be less than acceptable. The killer was a union attempt to require a full train crew when the bus was on rails. Despite the test failure, one of the buses retained its hi-rail gear when all six of them went into regular street service.  Name the bus company and the city, with extra credit for the intended railroad, and where the testing took place.

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 3,975 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Monday, March 23, 2020 2:14 PM

I was trying to find a reference for CSL having "Fresh Air Cars" at the same time - the term "vestibule door" would probably also mean the bulkhead door since Chicago cars often ran with the rear platform doors open.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 10,499 posts
Posted by Overmod on Monday, March 23, 2020 12:38 PM

As I recall, there was a very similar "innovation" on streetcars consisting of keeping the doors open all the time -- the references I remember using the term 'vestibule doors' which I associated with something other than typical folding entry/exit doors.  Added to the comfort issues would be the risk of people falling out, I'd think ... it did not last long, either.

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 15,861 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Monday, March 23, 2020 2:46 AM

Why did they disable the heaters?   Just dumb!   The heat was even more necessary in these cars.  Doesn't Chicago experience a months' worth or more of days and certainly nights with below-freezing temperature every winter

I had assumed the modifications were for 2000-series cars.

You should ask another question, since my answer was incorrect.

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 3,975 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Sunday, March 22, 2020 2:24 PM

"Too much fresh air is just enough" was one of the mottoes posted in Chicago Elevated Railways "Fresh Air" cars.  Thes cars were taken from the Northwestern El's 1260-1299 series trailers, built by ACF in 1907 with semi-convertible sash, a drop pocket in the side, and a pocket in the roof.  CER modified the cars so the windows were kept open and the heaters disabled, and put one car each in the middle of several trains.  The service was inaugurated on November 15, 1915, just in time for winter.  For what should be obvious reasons, the cars were not very popular, and the cars resumed their normal configuration pretty quickly.  Car 1268 from this series, modifed in 1916 as a control trailer, survives in operable condition at Illinois Railway Museum.

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 15,861 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Sunday, March 22, 2020 10:10 AM

My guess is that the upper sash of some or all of the windows was replaced with a venilation device that admitted and exhausted air without a direct wind, like roof-mounted ventilators.  But the these cars were obviously colder in winter, and Chicago winters are cold.  Possibly called air-flow cars or breezers or fresh-air cars?

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 3,975 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Saturday, March 21, 2020 2:06 PM

So here's something that mixes current events with history...

During a flu scare, in a response to people complaining of getting sick from the foul air on "L" trains, the Chicago Elevated Railways modified several cars in 1915 for health purposes.  The cars were not widely accepted, and were quickly withdrawn from service and restored to their former configuration.  What were the modifications, and what were the cars called?

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