I have seen many A-B-A sets of FT diesels that all carried the same road number because all three units were treated like a single locomotive.
.
Was this practice ever carried into the EMD F3 series of locomotives?
I am painting an A-B-A set of F3 locmotives, and I was thinking of giving them all the same unit number. Would this be plausible? Was it ever done on a prototype F3?
The only thing I was able to verify was the C&NW F3A/FTB/FTA sets.
-Kevin
Living the dream.
Yes and no.
SP&S bought two F3A's: 800A-1 and 800A-2. So, their road number was 800. But you will see they could be individually identified. If you needed to file a failure report, you needed to say which of the two units failed.
It lasted about 3 years. Then they were renumbered 800 and 801.
GN bought lotsa F's, including F3's and F7's in sets. So you might have a locomotive delivered as 444 with 4 units: 444A, 444B, 444C, 444D. I have no idea how long they stayed as a running set. After all, if 444B fails, and you have 452C available, wouldn't you just drop that one in?
I don't think any railroads bought F3's and didn't at least "sub-number" them.
Ed
fYes. Western Pacific had F3 and F7 sets. F3 #a,b,c: F7#a,b,c,d which retained their suffix even after being split up. a&d were A units, b&c were B units The F7 d had steam generators
I tried to sell my two cents worth, but no one would give me a plug nickel for it.
I don't have a leg to stand on.
DSchmitt Yes. Western Pacific had F3 and F7 sets. #a,b,c,d which retained their suffix even after being split up.
Yes. Western Pacific had F3 and F7 sets. #a,b,c,d which retained their suffix even after being split up.
M636C DSchmitt Yes. Western Pacific had F3 and F7 sets. #a,b,c,d which retained their suffix even after being split up. I stand to be corrected on this, but the F7 cab in the Sacramento museum is, I believe 917, not sure whether A or C (they were a, b, d, c, weren't they?). The other cab unit from that set went to Western Australia and is preserved there... Now that's being split up... They didn't run in Australia with the original numbers, sadly. Peter
No F7 a & d were cabs b & c cabless
https://www.thedieselshop.us/WP.HTML
The F3 were initally #nosuffex,b,c but then renumbered #a,b,c (b&c cabless) There was one F3 d It was ex NYO&W #503 aquired by the Sacramento Northern #303 but used by the WP as 801d
However - The FT numbering/renumbering was more complicated.
The last WP F7 were the "fab four" They were cab units renumbered 913, 917, 918 and 921 with no suffix.
Not all railroads followed the same practices for numbering F-units. So, you will have to do some research for each railroad you are interested in. Units sometimes were renumbered, and therefore, you would have to know the period of time you are intersted in.
Railroads would purchase F-units in multiple unit sets. Later, the sets would would be divided up and units would be intermixed in various consists. With some railroads, that affected the numbers of each of the units.
GARRY
HEARTLAND DIVISION, CB&Q RR
EVERYWHERE LOST; WE HUSTLE OUR CABOOSE FOR YOU
If I remember correctly, the FTs were delivered with a drawbar between each unit, instead of couplers. This would explain all the units with the same number.
But each railroad did their own numbering system.
Heartland Division CB&QNot all railroads followed the same practices for numbering F-units. So, you will have to do some research for each railroad you are interested in
This is for my free-lanced railroad, so research is not possible. I try to do very few things that there is not at least some prototype precedent for.
I really want to number all three of these F units the same, because it will help with a weird operational issue, but it seems that the F3's did not carry the same road numbers in dedicated consists.
The lack of a "short" FT B unit in HO scale is the real source of my problem.
I just can't run an A-B-B-A set. Too long.
SeeYou190 I really want to number all three of these F units the same, because it will help with a weird operational issue, but it seems that the F3's did not carry the same road numbers in dedicated consists.
It seems you missed my example of an AA set for the SP&S. The number boards on each sported "800".
There was nothing stopping them from also getting a B unit for the middle, except they didn't NEED three units for the job.
7j43kIt seems you missed my example of an AA set for the SP&S. The number boards on each sported "800".
Sorry, I misinterpreted your reply.
I thought that the numberboards said 800A1 and 800A2.
If they were both numbered 800 on the boards, I think that gives me the "green light" to number to two units the same.
Thanks.
fr
SeeYou190I really want to number all three of these F units the same, because it will help with a weird operational issue, but it seems that the F3's did not carry the same road numbers in dedicated consists.
????? Wrong WP F3 and F7 were initally run in dedicated consist sets with all units having the same number with a sufix added. The numbers were not changed when the sets were broken up. See my posts above.
By the way the number on the "number boards" aren't necessairly the locomotive number. Depends on period and railroad practice at the time. They can be used to identify the train. Some railroads use number of lead locomotive others had different systems.
There were/are no rules for numbering locomotives. Each railroad determines its own system. Usually they are numbered in a series by locomotive type That isi 800 series 800, 801, 802 etc.
On the WP starting with GP20 the first two didits of the four digit number appproximately represented the horsepower of the units GP20 ,2001-2010, U23B 2251-2265, GP35 3001-3022, GP40 3501-3559
At least one small railroad numbered their locomotives in order acquired. Made up example #1 SW1 #2 Alco S3, #3 GP9, #4 GP7, #5 Alco S3 ultimately very confusing.
SeeYou190 7j43k It seems you missed my example of an AA set for the SP&S. The number boards on each sported "800". I thought that the numberboards said 800A1 and 800A2. . If they were both numbered 800 on the boards, I think that gives me the "green light" to number to two units the same. . Thanks. . -Kevin .
7j43k It seems you missed my example of an AA set for the SP&S. The number boards on each sported "800".
When the various "early" SP&S road diesels were first delivered (Alco FA's and EMD F3's), they were viewed as multi-unit single locomotives. So the whole thing was, say, 868. Individual units had a reference number--might be 868B-2*. It was placed in teeny little lettering low down, towards the end. At first, there was no other numbering than those reference numbers and the numberboards.
Things changed, after awhile.
868: 868A-1, 868B-1, 868B-2, 868A-2
While very common use, number boards aren't always used for the locomotive number Depends on the practice of the railroad.
Anybody have a picture of a "short" booster? And one of a "long" one for comparison? Tried a Google search and didn't find anything...
Steve
If everything seems under control, you're not going fast enough!
EMC/EMD designed the FT to be two units connected with a drawbar, the A unit with the cab and a cabless B or booster unit. There was originally no provision for couplers between the A and B units, so you could only use A-B sets alone, or two together A-B+B-A. They later came up with the FTSB (FT Short Booster) which allowed an A-B-A set, all connected with drawbars (but the shorter B unit couldn't be equipped with a steam generator and tanks for passenger service). ATSF requested couplers between all units, and EMD jerry-rigged a way to do that.
The problem railroads ran into is one A-B set was 2700 horsepower (1350 HP per unit) and two A-B sets were 5400 HP, but most mailine freights needed about 4000 HP. After WW2, many railroads bought F2 or F3 A units and used them together with one FT set to make A-B+A sets.
Steam era railroad contracts required one engineer and fireman for each locomotive. The unions argued each diesel in a lash-up was a separate engine requiring it's own crew. Because of that, railroad often numbered F-unit sets with the same number saying it was all one locomotive (like 400A-400B-400C-400D). Often a four unit "engine" was two A-B sets with drawbars between them, largely because one A-B set could fit onto a steam era turntable or in a roundhouse stall. Once the railroads and unions agreed that only one engineer and fireman per lash-up of diesels were required, many railroads broke up the sets and renumbered them...although some railroads, like Northern Pacific, kept F-unit sets together long after.
NWP SWPAnybody have a picture of a "short" booster?
Steven,
If you google "HO BRASS FTSB", you will see plenty of examples. The short booster only has two strirrup steps hanging down. The standard "long" booster has an extra set of stirrups opposite the end that couples to the cab unit. That is where the extra length comes from.
I know "stirrup" is the incorrect term, but the proper wording is escaping me right now.