Diesel Quiz pt.2

[MopacBarrettTunnel]

 Rather than start a new thread, here's another tender converted to a steam generator car after retirement; Rio Grande 250, formerly Challenger #3703's tender..........

 

[doctorwayne]

My favourite prototype road, the TH&B, converted a tender from one of their ex-NYC Hudsons into a steam heater car, also.

Wayne

It still exists on the Green Mountain in North Walpole NH! From time to time they'd use it, but not recently to my knowledge. Does anyone out there know for sure? 

I had a feeling that it was still around, but I couldn't remember where.  Thanks for the reminder.  The TH&B's Hudsons, numbered 501 and 502, were both J1d's and were former NYC locos 5311 and 5313 respectively.  The steam generator was built from the tender of the 502.

Wayne

[PBenham]

My favourite prototype road, the TH&B, converted a tender from one of their ex-NYC Hudsons into a steam heater car, also.

Wayne

It still exists on the Green Mountain in North Walpole NH! From time to time they'd use it, but not recently to my knowledge. Does anyone out there know for sure? 

[PBenham]

I believe the NYO&W also converted a retired tender into a steam heater car.  It may have run behind FT's but most photos of O&W diesel powered passenger trains I've seen seemed to show an F-3 as power.

By the time NYO&W dieselized its passenger service, the trains only needed a single F3 for power. FTs had been used on some special moves, but with steam generator cars from New York Central in the trains.

[doctorwayne]

My favourite prototype road, the TH&B, converted a tender from one of their ex-NYC Hudsons into a steam heater car, also.

Wayne

[bobontroy]

I believe the NYO&W also converted a retired tender into a steam heater car.  It may have run behind FT's but most photos of O&W diesel powered passenger trains I've seen seemed to show an F-3 as power.

[doctorwayne]

Original owners of the shorter FTSB included the Lackawanna, Rock Island, Great Northern, Southern, and M&StL.  The first four also owned standard FTB's.  The DL&W converted a tender from a P-Class 4-8-2 as an adapter car, and numbered it the X600.

I wish I could claim to be the source of this info, but I got it from the November 2006 issue of RMC, which had a good article on the prototype and a companion piece on building the model.

Wayne

 The most correct answer for Southern's FTSBs would be the New Orleans & North Eastern, which these days would have NONE for their reporting marks.

The RMC article did contain that information.  Unfortunately, the number of these units preserved was exactly the same:  NONE.

 Wayne

[PBenham]

Original owners of the shorter FTSB included the Lackawanna, Rock Island, Great Northern, Southern, and M&StL.  The first four also owned standard FTB's.  The DL&W converted a tender from a P-Class 4-8-2 as an adapter car, and numbered it the X600.

I wish I could claim to be the source of this info, but I got it from the November 2006 issue of RMC, which had a good article on the prototype and a companion piece on building the model.

Wayne

 

 

 

 

 The most correct answer for Southern's FTSBs would be the New Orleans & North Eastern, which these days would have NONE for their reporting marks.

[J. Edgar]

 

 

 1 union rules/agreements

 2 a-b with short drawbars  a-b-a w/ short   a-b-b-a  matched a-b with long drawbars between b units

 3 duh.......dunno

 4 ive read that the GM managment at the time shevled a GPT or "road switcher"....il have to dig to find it......but i agree they mighta missed the first boat but.......

[Cris_261]

Re question 2....Remember that the original FT design was for drawbar-connected A/B sets ONLY. (BTW NP had some A-B-B-A sets where all four units were connected with drawbars only!!) It was only when railroads like GN said they really wanted the ability to run A-B-A sets that GM reluctantly came up with the FTSB "option". GM / EMD would have kept things without options (except for steam generator or engine heater) otherwise.

In another take on the FT originally being set up for drawbar linked A-B sets only, the Santa Fe threw a wrench into this concept by ordering all of their FT B units with couplers on both ends. Railroads with drawbar equipped FT units later converted them to couplers to increase the flexibility of locomotive assignments.

What prompted the NP to hang on to an A-B set of FTs clear up to the BN merger?

[PBenham]

Last in the US, or is Mexico included?  The SBC used FTs, perhaps the NP ones, maybe into the 1970s-80s

The SBC units were the last to be operated. The last FTs operated by their original owner were NPs, with BN running the last remaning such units in the US of A. BTW: FTs were operated in Canada by GN, NP and NYC

[PBenham]

Re question 2....Remember that the original FT design was for drawbar-connected A/B sets ONLY. (BTW NP had some A-B-B-A sets where all four units were connected with drawbars only!!) It was only when railroads like GN said they really wanted the ability to run A-B-A sets that GM reluctantly came up with the FTSB "option". GM / EMD would have kept things without options (except for steam generator or engine heater) otherwise.

Good point. EMD some times had to be pushed into doing some things like building road switchers,turbocharging the 567 and giving up on the BL2 even after its short comings were painfully evident.

[wjstix]

Re question 2....Remember that the original FT design was for drawbar-connected A/B sets ONLY. (BTW NP had some A-B-B-A sets where all four units were connected with drawbars only!!) It was only when railroads like GN said they really wanted the ability to run A-B-A sets that GM reluctantly came up with the FTSB "option". GM / EMD would have kept things without options (except for steam generator or engine heater) otherwise.

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

The last operator of FT's in the US was Burlington Northern, by two or three days.  The BN merger took effect on March 1, 1970 and the last FT's from NP were retired within the next day or two.  In fact, the last FT set (A and B) was assigned BN numbers 798-799 but was obviously never renumbered.

[WSOR 3801]

Last in the US, or is Mexico included?  The SBC used FTs, perhaps the NP ones, maybe into the 1970s-80s

[PBenham]

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that it was either WP or M&StL.

Hindsight may be 20-20, but I don't think that EMD goofed by not offering a road-switcher version of the FT.  The goal of the FT was to get diesels in mainline freight service, and a road-switcher version would have been a distraction from that goal.  A road-switcher design would have probably wound up on branches, local freights and transfers, with mainline freights still pulled by steam.

That is quite in line with Dick Dilworth's reasoning in 1948, when he "cleaned up" the BL2, creating the GP7. GM,however is still not exactly burning up the road in the way of innovations 60 years later! The new EMD is going to be quite different than it's "parent". I suspect that EMD has something in the wings, having a test bed out on the road soon.

Now for a final FT question: Northern Pacific was the last operator of FTs (true or false) IF the answer is false who operated the last FT?

[PBenham]

Original owners of the shorter FTSB included the Lackawanna, Rock Island, Great Northern, Southern, and M&StL.  The first four also owned standard FTB's.  The DL&W converted a tender from a P-Class 4-8-2 as an adapter car, and numbered it the X600.

I wish I could claim to be the source of this info, but I got it from the November 2006 issue of RMC, which had a good article on the prototype and a companion piece on building the model.

Wayne

 

Doc: You are doing your research! The X600 has to be the most bizarre re-use of a steam locomotive tender I know of!

[doctorwayne]

Original owners of the shorter FTSB included the Lackawanna, Rock Island, Great Northern, Southern, and M&StL.  The first four also owned standard FTB's.  The DL&W converted a tender from a P-Class 4-8-2 as an adapter car, and numbered it the X600.

I wish I could claim to be the source of this info, but I got it from the November 2006 issue of RMC, which had a good article on the prototype and a companion piece on building the model.

Wayne

 

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that it was either WP or M&StL.

Hindsight may be 20-20, but I don't think that EMD goofed by not offering a road-switcher version of the FT.  The goal of the FT was to get diesels in mainline freight service, and a road-switcher version would have been a distraction from that goal.  A road-switcher design would have probably wound up on branches, local freights and transfers, with mainline freights still pulled by steam.

[PBenham]

1   (I think) they had manually controlled radiator shutters which required going back through  the consist and seting each one

2   With and w/o hostler controls and some boosters were meant to be the center of 3 unit consists and were 4' 3" shorter than standard.

3   GN

4   They did.   The TR-1.   Only available in AB (or cow/calf) and only bought by IC   

OK, but there's another FTSB owner out there. Hint: They converted a steam locomotive tender to an adapter car, having a drawbar on one end and a regular coupler on the other end,so they wouldn't lose all three units of an A-B-A set if one of the cab units took a .

[jimrice4449]

1   (I think) they had manually controlled radiator shutters which required going back through  the consist and seting each one

2   With and w/o hostler controls and some boosters were meant to be the center of 3 unit consists and were 4' 3" shorter than standard.

3   GN

4   They did.   The TR-1.   Only available in AB (or cow/calf) and only bought by IC   

[PBenham]

 The FT did a lot to revolutionize railroading.

1. Firemen on most roads that owned FTs had no reason to fear losing their jobs (but they didn't like them for the same reason) because...

2. The FT was unique in that the customer had a choice of booster unit configurations. What were the options, beyond presence/ absence of a steam generator. 

3. Which customers had both FTB types on their roster.

4. Do you believe EMD erred in not building a companion model GPT? (Have fun, folks!)

For what it's worth I think that EMD slipped up, but they had built an end cab/booster transfer unit for Illinois Central, so there we are. This slip gave Alco, Baldwin and Fairbanks-Morse some life, until EMD woke up and introduced the GP7.