I do not know anything about the prototype for this model. It does look to be all metal with four wheeled trucks and horizontal ribbing. Would it be considered a streamliner?
The open platform on the rear looks like a throw-back to heavyweight observations cars, but it is not a heavyweight.
It appears to be a whole passenger train in one unit. It has a RPO, baggage section, and passenger accomodations.
Would this be a one-car streamliner?
-Kevin
Living the dream.
The car looks like it may be a trailer for a motor car. The side fluting smacks of Milwaukee Road rib sided boxcar construction and it is an "all-in-one" train, containing RPO, express and, passenger compartments.
SeeYou190 I do not know anything about the prototype for this model. It does look to be all metal with four wheeled trucks and horizontal ribbing. Would it be considered a streamliner? The open platform on the rear looks like a throw-back to heavyweight observations cars, but it is not a heavyweight. It appears to be a whole passenger train in one unit. It has a RPO, baggage section, and passenger accomodations. Would this be a one-car streamliner? -Kevin
I don't know the car either, but the trucks are a pretty old design, well before any streamlined/lightweight cars. Looks to be an early steel car of some sort, likely purpose built for a small branchline that had a postal contract - I would say 1920's.
Not all heavyweight cars had clerestory roofs, side belt rails or riveted construction that was obvious.
As for streamlined trains, the B&O took heavyweight cars, stripped the down to the floors, and rebuilt them into streamlined smooth sided steel cars with fixed windows and A/C, but they were anything but light weight. The retained their heavyweight 6 wheel trucks, concrete floors, and original brakes.
As for train size, many of the B&O top name train "streamliners" were only 6-8 cars.
Sheldon
NHTX The car looks like it may be a trailer for a motor car. The side fluting smacks of Milwaukee Road rib sided boxcar construction and it is an "all-in-one" train, containing RPO, express passenger compartments.
The car looks like it may be a trailer for a motor car. The side fluting smacks of Milwaukee Road rib sided boxcar construction and it is an "all-in-one" train, containing RPO, express passenger compartments.
Agreed, I was thinking that too, but don't know much about their passenger operations.
I found it:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/33672589@N08/albums/72157633437687149/
ATLANTIC CENTRAL SeeYou190 I do not know anything about the prototype for this model. It does look to be all metal with four wheeled trucks and horizontal ribbing. Would it be considered a streamliner? The open platform on the rear looks like a throw-back to heavyweight observations cars, but it is not a heavyweight. It appears to be a whole passenger train in one unit. It has a RPO, baggage section, and passenger accomodations. Would this be a one-car streamliner? -Kevin I found it: https://www.flickr.com/photos/33672589@N08/albums/72157633437687149/ Sheldon
It almost looks like an unmotored doodlebug. I've read about branchlines that would have both baggage and passenger sections on a caboose. I'm wondering if this car served that purpose.
I have mixed emotions when I see photos of vintage equipment like this. I'm glad there are people who save this equipment from being scrapped but I hate to see it in such poor condition. I understand that it would require a lot of money to restore it to original condition and most preservationists and museums are on shoestring budgets. I wish there was a solution to this. Maybe we could get Elon Musk interested. He doesn't seem to have much else on his plate these days.
wjstix Many of the early (1930's) streamliners were short trains compared to what they expanded to during/after WW2. The early streamliners were the railroad's "top of the line" and most expensive trains to ride, so during the Depression had a limited clientele - often businessmen travelling 'on business' rather than families of tourists. For example, I recall a picture of an early streamlined Santa Fe Super Chief which was one E-unit and six cars. Milwaukee Road's first Hiawatha was IIRC six cars. Burlington' first Zephyrs were only three cars, later expanded to four, and later versions (like the Twin City Hi) was at first only about six - seven cars. As earlier replies have mentioned, as the top trains expanded and railroads bought new streamlined equipment after WW2, the old streamlined cars often worked their way down to secondary trains. I'd note too that in model railroading our trains are generally shorter than real trains anyway. If a real railroad's mainline hosted 50-75 car mainline freights and 12-16 car passenger trains, a model railroad version of it running say 30 car freight and 6-8 car passenger trains keeps the same relative ratio so should look 'right'.
Many of the early (1930's) streamliners were short trains compared to what they expanded to during/after WW2. The early streamliners were the railroad's "top of the line" and most expensive trains to ride, so during the Depression had a limited clientele - often businessmen travelling 'on business' rather than families of tourists. For example, I recall a picture of an early streamlined Santa Fe Super Chief which was one E-unit and six cars. Milwaukee Road's first Hiawatha was IIRC six cars. Burlington' first Zephyrs were only three cars, later expanded to four, and later versions (like the Twin City Hi) was at first only about six - seven cars.
As earlier replies have mentioned, as the top trains expanded and railroads bought new streamlined equipment after WW2, the old streamlined cars often worked their way down to secondary trains.
I'd note too that in model railroading our trains are generally shorter than real trains anyway. If a real railroad's mainline hosted 50-75 car mainline freights and 12-16 car passenger trains, a model railroad version of it running say 30 car freight and 6-8 car passenger trains keeps the same relative ratio so should look 'right'.
A typical consist for my secondary trains is a couple coaches, a food service car of some sort, a baggage express, and an RPO. A combine might take the place of one coach and a baggage express. The shorter run trains don't have either RPOs or diners. I run lots of passenger trains of all types. Probably too many in relation to the freight hauled but this is where I invoke the "my railroad, my rules".
Here's some pictures of a preserved close relative of this car's prototype. Built for service on MILW's extensive branch lines (the curse of every granger). So if the exact car hasn't been restored, something quite like it has
Captioned "Ex-TP&W tool car #124, rebuilt from MILW open platform light weight "branch line" express-coach #2716"
Built 1937. Looks like the windows on one side were blanked off when converted for MOW service. (e
Look
Loox-TP(ex-TP&W 124, nee-MILW 2716) tool car rebuilt from LW open-platform "branchline" express - coach&W 124, nee-MILW 2716) tool car rebuilt from LW open-platform "branchline" express - coach.
Consider whether pulling that car with a G-6ps would qualify as streamlined... here's a model:
https://www.brasstrains.com/Classic/Product/Detail/069289/HO-Brass-Nickel-Plate-Milwaukee-Road-4-6-0-Hiawatha-Class-G-Streamlined-Modified-Skirts-Custom
The first goal would be to stabilize the car by getting it under cover. There's a cascade effect, in that vehicles are built to resist deterioration in various ways, but once rot grabs hold it becomes increasingly difficult to prevent its spread unless the car is well stabilized under some sort of shelter. Even an open-sided shed with wide eaves would be better than out in the open. This is definitely a museum piece in waiting. All commentors seem to agree it is pretty unique. I hope it is saved. Even if they have no funds for restoration, many railroad and other museums frequently acquire pieces worth having, and store them properly awaiting future restoration. Sometimes an appropriately displayed and signed old rust bucket awaiting final disposition is as much of an attraction as the restored beauties. People often find restoration work fascinating to watch.
Although I still can't imagine its intended use, it seems like the car in question was purpose-built, and not a mishmash slap-together long after it was first constructed according to another plan. The indicator to me is how the side flutes terminate at door & window openings and corner posts. All the flutes pictured end the same way, meaning eased down to a standard-looking terminal point just before meeting door & window frames and corners. Hard to imagine going to that much effort long after the fact of its construction, even if the present fluted sides are a later sheathing of an older car. Somebody thought this car had a serious purpose.
navyman636 The first goal would be to stabilize the car by getting it under cover. There's a cascade effect, in that vehicles are built to resist deterioration in various ways, but once rot grabs hold it becomes increasingly difficult to prevent its spread unless the car is well stabilized under some sort of shelter. Even an open-sided shed with wide eaves would be better than out in the open. This is definitely a museum piece in waiting. All commentors seem to agree it is pretty unique. I hope it is saved. Even if they have no funds for restoration, many railroad and other museums frequently acquire pieces worth having, and store them properly awaiting future restoration. Sometimes an appropriately displayed and signed old rust bucket awaiting final disposition is as much of an attraction as the restored beauties. People often find restoration work fascinating to watch. Although I still can't imagine its intended use, it seems like the car in question was purpose-built, and not a mishmash slap-together long after it was first constructed according to another plan. The indicator to me is how the side flutes terminate at door & window openings and corner posts. All the flutes pictured end the same way, meaning eased down to a standard-looking terminal point just before meeting door & window frames and corners. Hard to imagine going to that much effort long after the fact of its construction, even if the present fluted sides are a later sheathing of an older car. Somebody thought this car had a serious purpose.
I don't see why it is so hard to understand the cars intended use? The Milwaukee had lots of lightly traveled branch lines for which they had mail and express contracts to fulfill.
One car to do all three jobs. Maybe when traffic was peak, a baggage and a coach would be added as well.
Open platforms would have been selected to reduce both construction cost and maintenence costs. Diaphragms and extra doors cost money on both counts.
Being build with the same profile and structure as rib sided streamline cars Milwaukee also had would have saved tooling and production costs as well.
But shorter length, lighter weight, would have not required more modern trucks and brakes.
It's purpose is clear, the key part of a 1 to 3 car branchline train, likely pulled by an Atlantic, Ten Wheeler or small Pacific, allowing it to be fast and nimble on lighter track, likely with sharp curves and steeper grades, also the reason for the cars shorter length.
It may be important to understand that the mail contract alone likely covered the cost of operation of the whole train on any given branchline, and however small, revenues from paying passengers and express business would be 100% profit.
Also there was the problem of getting state and federal authorities to agree to cancelling the train. Many lines were built with the charter obliging the railroad to offer passenger service on them. Even if this sort of car wasn't profitable, it may well have cut the losses, so that was a plus. I guess MILW also looked at the cost of maintaining the ancient sort of equipment usually banished to such runs and decided modern cars would reduce that cost as well.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL navyman636 The first goal would be to stabilize the car by getting it under cover. There's a cascade effect, in that vehicles are built to resist deterioration in various ways, but once rot grabs hold it becomes increasingly difficult to prevent its spread unless the car is well stabilized under some sort of shelter. Even an open-sided shed with wide eaves would be better than out in the open. This is definitely a museum piece in waiting. All commentors seem to agree it is pretty unique. I hope it is saved. Even if they have no funds for restoration, many railroad and other museums frequently acquire pieces worth having, and store them properly awaiting future restoration. Sometimes an appropriately displayed and signed old rust bucket awaiting final disposition is as much of an attraction as the restored beauties. People often find restoration work fascinating to watch. Although I still can't imagine its intended use, it seems like the car in question was purpose-built, and not a mishmash slap-together long after it was first constructed according to another plan. The indicator to me is how the side flutes terminate at door & window openings and corner posts. All the flutes pictured end the same way, meaning eased down to a standard-looking terminal point just before meeting door & window frames and corners. Hard to imagine going to that much effort long after the fact of its construction, even if the present fluted sides are a later sheathing of an older car. Somebody thought this car had a serious purpose. I don't see why it is so hard to understand the cars intended use? The Milwaukee had lots of lightly traveled branch lines for which they had mail and express contracts to fulfill. One car to do all three jobs. Maybe when traffic was peak, a baggage and a coach would be added as well. Open platforms would have been selected to reduce both construction cost and maintenence costs. Diaphragms and extra doors cost money on both counts. Being build with the same profile and structure as rib sided streamline cars Milwaukee also had would have saved tooling and production costs as well. But shorter length, lighter weight, would have not required more modern trucks and brakes. It's purpose is clear, the key part of a 1 to 3 car branchline train, likely pulled by an Atlantic, Ten Wheeler or small Pacific, allowing it to be fast and nimble on lighter track, likely with sharp curves and steeper grades, also the reason for the cars shorter length. It may be important to understand that the mail contract alone likely covered the cost of operation of the whole train on any given branchline, and however small, revenues from paying passengers and express business would be 100% profit. Sheldon
I'm wondering if it might have been used as a caboose on a branch line mixed train, serving to accomodate both crew and passengers, and also had a section for mail/baggage/express. It seems to be an all purpose car, much like a doodlebug but without its own power.
If you look at the model, there is a smoke jack - presumably for a stove - in the baggage compartment. Not sure if that did much for the passengers or RPO clerks, but maybe it produced low pressure steam to heat radiators along the floor boards in those compartments. So it seems you would be justified to tack it onto the rear of a mixed.
John-NYBW ATLANTIC CENTRAL navyman636 The first goal would be to stabilize the car by getting it under cover. There's a cascade effect, in that vehicles are built to resist deterioration in various ways, but once rot grabs hold it becomes increasingly difficult to prevent its spread unless the car is well stabilized under some sort of shelter. Even an open-sided shed with wide eaves would be better than out in the open. This is definitely a museum piece in waiting. All commentors seem to agree it is pretty unique. I hope it is saved. Even if they have no funds for restoration, many railroad and other museums frequently acquire pieces worth having, and store them properly awaiting future restoration. Sometimes an appropriately displayed and signed old rust bucket awaiting final disposition is as much of an attraction as the restored beauties. People often find restoration work fascinating to watch. Although I still can't imagine its intended use, it seems like the car in question was purpose-built, and not a mishmash slap-together long after it was first constructed according to another plan. The indicator to me is how the side flutes terminate at door & window openings and corner posts. All the flutes pictured end the same way, meaning eased down to a standard-looking terminal point just before meeting door & window frames and corners. Hard to imagine going to that much effort long after the fact of its construction, even if the present fluted sides are a later sheathing of an older car. Somebody thought this car had a serious purpose. I don't see why it is so hard to understand the cars intended use? The Milwaukee had lots of lightly traveled branch lines for which they had mail and express contracts to fulfill. One car to do all three jobs. Maybe when traffic was peak, a baggage and a coach would be added as well. Open platforms would have been selected to reduce both construction cost and maintenence costs. Diaphragms and extra doors cost money on both counts. Being build with the same profile and structure as rib sided streamline cars Milwaukee also had would have saved tooling and production costs as well. But shorter length, lighter weight, would have not required more modern trucks and brakes. It's purpose is clear, the key part of a 1 to 3 car branchline train, likely pulled by an Atlantic, Ten Wheeler or small Pacific, allowing it to be fast and nimble on lighter track, likely with sharp curves and steeper grades, also the reason for the cars shorter length. It may be important to understand that the mail contract alone likely covered the cost of operation of the whole train on any given branchline, and however small, revenues from paying passengers and express business would be 100% profit. Sheldon I'm wondering if it might have been used as a caboose on a branch line mixed train, serving to accomodate both crew and passengers, and also had a section for mail/baggage/express. It seems to be an all purpose car, much like a doodlebug but without its own power.
I don't know much about Milwaukee operations, but I would think that possible as well.
BEAUSABRE If you look at the model, there is a smoke jack - presumably for a stove - in the baggage compartment. Not sure if that did much for the passengers or RPO clerks, but maybe it produced low pressure steam to heat radiators along the floor boards in those compartments. So it seems you would be justified to tack it onto the rear of a mixed.
I would think a small fuel oil boiler for steam or hot water heat in both the RPO section and the passenger section, so it would not be dependant on loco steam.
Santa Fe had trains 42 and 47 between Phoenix and the main line at Williams Jct. Before Mid 1967 it had baggage car/coach/diner-lounge/sleeper. By the last train in April 1969, it was just a coach and a baggage car.
Caption for this picture (link below) says:
2709 was a branchline combine which was rebuilt from an older car. The exterior received the ribbed sides of a streamliner, but the interior was completely early days. All wood, walkover plush seats, kerosene lights, etc.
I presume these were cars built with steel underframes c.1900 but otherwise wood. Milwaukee Road added their typical rib-sides to the cars in the 30's.
Since they had their own stove (or stoves, appears this one has two stacks) they didn't need to get heat from the engine so could work at the end of the train in lieu of having a caboose.
In a one-man RPO section on a branchline, I'm not sure if the RPO section would have to have been entirely separated from the rest of the car or not?
https://donsdepot.donrossgroup.net/dr0301/mil2709.jpg
deleted