I'm planning a mixed train operation for my new branch line. I've done some research and have found examples of the passenger car(s) on the head end and some with them on the tail end. I've seen them with a standard caboose and others that had the passenger cars at the rear of the train and the crew would ride in a section of the last car, often a combine. I even read one story about a mixed train that had so few riders that it had passenger accomodations in the caboose. My question is whether one way or the other was more common. Would the passenger cars more likely be up front? Would they be more likely to be on the rear? Would it be more common to have a caboose or to have the crew ride one of the passenger cars?
jecorbettI'm planning a mixed train operation for my new branch line. I've done some research and have found examples of the passenger car(s) on the head end and some with them on the tail end. I've seen them with a standard caboose and others that had the passenger cars at the rear of the train and the crew would ride in a section of the last car, often a combine. I even read one story about a mixed train that had so few riders that it had passenger accomodations in the caboose. My question is whether one way or the other was more common. Would the passenger cars more likely be up front? Would they be more likely to be on the rear? Would it be more common to have a caboose or to have the crew ride one of the passenger cars?
To me it seems a waste to lug a caboose and a passenger car. In that situation it the car would need to be at the rear. If you model just a passenger section in the caboose it would not appear any different than a normal freight.
Most of Santa Fe's coach-baggage-caboose (called cabbage) used for this type of service were converted from 70' coaches or smoking cars. They were used into the late 1960s.
Santa Fe ran a number of mixed trains where passenger traffic very light. Often used combines designated as "coach/baggage/caboose" with coach seating area. baggage area and area for conductor's desk. Book Coach, Cabbage and Caboose covers ATSF mixdd trains in exhaustive detail. ATSF had ONE mixed train combine almost identical to Atlas/Rivarossi N scale heavyweight combine (shown here on stagede mixed train photo). Santa Fe also had dozens of similar combines almost the same as Atlas model shown except for one or two windows so this model makes an ideal standin for a Santa Fe mixed. I think similar car was made in HO.
[img] http://www.trainboard.com/railimages/data/511/CombinMxTrn.JPG[/img]
(Sorry, I couldn't get Trains website to give me the icon to load an image directly. Sometimes I can get it, sometimes not. Don't know why...)
My wife rode as a passenger many times in CABOOSE MIXED on Santa Fe in Kansas in 1950s on branch line between Hillsboro and McPherson. Regular caboose had a few seats for passengers.
I believe a "mixed train" is a scheduled passenger train that MAY, in addition, haul freight cars. Note the word: "scheduled".
That would mean, for example, that one could have a mixed train without freight cars. Because there were none needed/available for the train.
To the OP: I suggest that you have two ways to view this.
Either you study a very particular example. Or you fabricate your own.
For the former, just do what they did. For the latter, just do what you choose.
For me, the fallback is to run a combine in regular service. Add freight cars as necessary. You MIGHT stick in an RPO, either in the combine or as a separate car. That depends on lotsa variables.
You can add coaches as necessary.
I surely don't know Santa Fe practice. I suppose they could have run a caboose with passengers sitting in it. If they did, I expect the car would have have to have been in regularly scheduled service. I wonder if a "regular" caboose would be acceptable. Do consider the possibility that the train would be a loco and a caboose. With passengers inside. I suppose, in some situations, that would work.
Interesting question,
Ed
I remember reading somewhere that railroads tried to place the passenger cars at the rear of the train to minimize exposure to the smoke & cinders from the locomotives, and so they could be left standing undisturbed if the train needed to switch out freight cars during the journey.
Mike
A significant reason why the passenger accomodation may be next to the loco is for heat if they were steam-heated. Often enough, a coal stove could substitute. It probably depended on the number of passengers and size of the car. Short car/caboose and few passengers, everyone could cluster near the stove. Long cars/many passengers and steam heta worked better.
The form of the passenger accomodations soemtimes depended on the state RR or public utlities commission's order regarding required service. This could be in the form of a generally-applied standard. But sometimes a mixed train was the substitute for a previous passenger trains and the RR may have been required to maintain certain amentities (like heat ) based on the the order allowing them to swicth to mixed train service.
I agree that a schedule was often involved, but how much that was honored depended on the demand for ridership and the need to move freight expeditiously. If a mail contract was involved, then there was additional pressure to maintain the schedule and likely the freight service may have been more secondary than getting over the line on schedule because of contractural obligations with the post office.
While the Santa Fe seems to have worked this out, it's possible that labor contracts may have required separate accomodations for the crew in some cases, necessitating both a coach and a caboose.
Mike Lehman
Urbana, IL
"My question is whether one way or the other was more common."
As mentioned in the responses so far, there were several variables that resulted in several different responses from various railroads. Clearly, if you are modeling a particular line, it would be best to seek out photos or information on mixed trains on that line. A general response to your question can still be formed, I think, by reviewing the photos in the classic railroad book Mixed Train Daily by Beebe & Clegg. By far, the most common arrangement in those photos is a train with a combination car on the rear (and also housing the rear-end crew). In the South during the segregation era, that combination car may well have been of the "Jim Crow" variety.
Bill
One of my very dim memories of Model Railroader articles past was of a mixed train combine that had been fitted with a coupola.
I once encountered an 'impromptu' mixed train. The schedule was usually protected by a three car DMU set. Then, one day, it showed up with a C11 class 2-6-4, a boxcar, an empty gon and two decrepit coaches. Somebody at the end of the branch had a shipment too urgent to wait for the nightly freight, and the empty was probably going to cause that freight to be too long for the rather short sidings.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
In general they would be found at the rear of a train. If there was a separate caboose for the conductor and rear brakeman, then it would most likely be marshalled immediately ahead of the caboose. Heat, if required, would be provided by a Baker heater or stove, operated by a tail-end crew member. Dealing with the passengers is the responsibility of the conductor, which includes selling tickets, ensuring they behave safely, and that the train stops to allow them to detrain at their destination. He needs to have ready access to the passenger accomodation at all times when the train is moving. And practice of the time always had the conductor at the rear of the train.
First let's look at the mixed train.
Unless there was a state law or union agreement most railroads would not want to use a caboose since the local crew could ride in the combine and would be able to help load/unload any express shipments.
Most railroads would want the passenger car on the rear due to switching moves.No need to switch cars with passengers(if any) on board.Recall you may be required to setout a boxcar of bag feed at Valley Farmers Supply and there is no place to put the passenger car.
Also should the branch line lack a way of turning the train due to track being taken out of service under the deferred maintenance plan the train may be require to reverse move out of the branch and the combine's platform would be the ideal place for the brakeman to stand while protecting the reverse move.
These lovely mixed train was money wasters and the railroads did every thing in their power to kill it including the deferred maintenance track plan I mention.
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
The AC&Y's mixed train is worth looking at. Freight service increased over the years, but the road was required to continue passenger service, primarily for the mail contract, until 1951. So one of their regularly scheduled daily freight trains was the mixed, with passenger cars where the caboose would have been. It was often as much as 40 cars long, and was usually handled by a 2-8-2 unless the traffic was light, in which case a class O ex-NYC 2-8-0 subbed. Until about 1941, the pasenger cars were a secondhand baggage-RPO and a secondhand coach. Then the road bought two secondhand RPO-Baggage/Express-Coach cars that had orginally been built in 1911 as coaches for the Philadelphia & Reading. These two cars, AC&Y numbers 261 and 262, each had all that was needed in a single car. These served until the mail contract was lost in late 1951 and passenger service was discontinued. When passenger service was discontinued, the road had to continue operation of the freight train, but didn't have enough extra cabooses. Numbers 261 and 262 had their mail catchers removed, were repainted from green to red, were renumbered 70 and 71, and were relettered in white. As such, they were operated as cabooses until about 1957,when they were finally retired. They never had cupolas, and they retained their clerestory roofs until the end.
There are several photos of these cars in the Morning Sun book on the AC&Y, which was published last year.
I have sent you a P.M.
Tom
(edited)
tomikawaTTOne of my very dim memories of Model Railroader articles past was of a mixed train combine that had been fitted with a coupola.
leighantMy wife rode as a passenger many times in CABOOSE MIXED on Santa Fe in Kansas in 1950s on branch line between Hillsboro and McPherson. Regular caboose had a few seats for passengers.
D&RGW Prospector could be called a mixed train in the mid 1960's, they tacked on TOFC flat cars on the back end. Pretty interesting stuff.
Rio Grande. The Action Road - Focus 1977-1983
As Mike touched on earlier, where the passenger car was on the train could depend on how the car was heated.
If the car was set up for steam heat, it normally would have to be behind the engine so it could be hooked up to the engine's steam lines, since general service freight cars wouldn't have steam lines the way express boxcars or reefers etc. would have.
One reason many mixed trains used old wood cars was because they had their own heat source, normally coal stoves. Because they had their own heat, they could be run on the end of the train. BTW people wouldn't have to huddle around the stove. Even on a large car, one Franklin free-standing stove would be enough to heat the whole car pretty well.
Of course in summer it wouldn't matter, so the passenger car could be used at the end of the train regardless of how the car was heated.
Stix,One way of chasing away passengers was to keep the car cold in the winter and hot in the summer.
For the coach or combine to be heated by steam the locomotive would need a steam boiler another costly item for a glorified local.
No wonder the railroads did everything in their power to turn that mixed into a local with standard caboose.
BRAKIE For the coach or combine to be heated by steam the locomotive would need a steam boiler another costly item for a glorified local.
Unless the train was being pulled by a steam engine of course...
I suspect for many railroads, getting a GP-9 or RS-3 with steam boiler in the long run was cheaper in operation than a steam engine, plus on a dead-end branch they could remove the turntable often found at the end of the branch.
I regret not getting over to Wisconsin in the 70's - 80's when the Soo Line ran 'mixed' trains by allowing passengers to ride in the caboose.
wjstixI regret not getting over to Wisconsin in the 70's - 80's when the Soo Line ran 'mixed' trains by allowing passengers to ride in the caboose.
Even though I rode in many cabooses as a brakeman I would still enjoy riding as a passenger in a caboose of a mixed train.
B&O was required to run passenger service out of Huntington, WV until Amtrak day, and they obeyed the law by having passengers ride in the caboose. I rode it from Huntington to Parkersburg shortly before the end. The train was hauled by F units and had a large bay window caboose that had been outfitted with some passenger car seats. Unfortunately, the crew had been delayed on their southbound run, and the hours of service law required that we leave after the scheduled time. As a result, I was disappointed that most of the run was in darkness.
ACYUnfortunately, the crew had been delayed on their southbound run, and the hours of service law required that we leave after the scheduled time. As a result, I was disappointed that most of the run was in darkness. Tom
Tom,I hope that didn't happen in the boonies.. I lost count of the times I hit the law in the middle of no where and had to wait on a crew wagon to pick us up.
Gotta ask.. Was there a working restroom in that caboose? The reason I ask that's where we kept extra fusses and batteries for our Starlite lanterns..
I won't try to sell you my book, Railroading on the Wabash Fourth District, available from Erstwhile Publications, but I devote an entire chapter on the mixed train that ran on the district btw Montpelier, Ohio and Gary, Indiana. It gives you a good synopsis of operation of a mixed train, mostly in the own words of railroaders that crewed it with photos and maps.
I'll summarize a little here to give you an idea how it was done on the Wabash. First of all, this train was a scheduled train and designated as a mixed in the employee timetable. Some of Wabash's other freight trains could carry passengers in a caboose but the Wabash did not call those mixeds.
The Gary Local began operation in 1933, when regular passenger service was discontinued on the Fourth District. Until its last service in the fall of 1962, it used a heavyweight combine (long since demoted from regular passenger service) with two coal-fired potbelly stoves, one in the passenger section and the other in the baggage section. Other than during WWII, this was the only local on the line and it switched all the industries, interchanges, etc., and went west on M-W-F and east on T-TR-Sat. The crew was based out of Montpelier on the east end and trainmen other than the engine crew bunked in the combine when overnight in Gary on the west end. Not only was the heat self-contained but the lighting was provided by kerosene lamps to the end.
The combine was never turned and always rode on the end of the train. The conductor had a table in one corner of the passenger section for his office. REA Express was hauled in the baggage section. Box cars loaded with Less-Than-Car-Load freight rode on the end of the train next to the combo. LCL and express were unloaded along the way. Rarely did it see any passengers. Because it was the local and had plenty of express and LCL plus car load customers, it was not a money loser. An REA man was assigned to the mixed, though he did get help from Wabash railroaders unloading the express.
A total of seven men crewed the train including engineer, firemen, head brakemen, "list man", rear brakeman (flag man) conductor and REA man. The list man helped direct the switching from the front end. When stopping at stations, if there was enough room, the combine and LCL cars would be parked at the station for unloading while the front end of the train switched industries, etc. However, if there was not enough room, the switching would be done first and then the cars would be parked and unloaded next.
Arrangements at Gary were ideal for the modeler, as the train was stored overnight in a small stub-ended yard with freight house, team tracks, some industry and a depot to the west of the frieght depot. There was no engine house, ash pit, wye or turntable, but the night switch crew would use the mixed's engine overnight and turn it on a wye west of Gary before returning it to the mixed for departure east the following morning. An elevated track in the yard was used by the hostler (an African American who lived in a shanty in the yard) to shovel coal from a gondola into the steam loco's tender on the next track. And a hose was used to water the tender, both refuelings just enough to get the train to the next online coaling and watering station to the east at Crocker, Indiana in the morning.
In steam days, the normal power was a Mikado (K-1 Class 2-8-2) and in diesel days a GP7 or GP9, but in the last days the train could get quite long with multiple units and on rare occasions, including an EMD F unit or FM Train Master.
There is much more in the book including photos, maps and commentary in the own words of a dear friend who was a conductor on that run for many years. I suppose I’m not allowed to provide the link here, but there are some photos on the Erstwhile Publications website. I hope this helps and gives you another scenario. I am finishing my second Wabash combine, having built the first for my conductor friend before he died. I do not model the Fourth District, but my proto-freelanced Wabash RR Indianapolis Branch btw Fort Wayne and Indianapolis, Indiana features a mixed like the Gary Local.
Victor A. Baird
Fort Wayne, Indiana
Larry:
The B&O Mixed used a very modern caboose with restroom facilities.
The southbound crew did not go on the hog law, but they arrived about 5 or 6 hours or so before they were scheduled to begin their northbound run. Since they couldn't go back on duty until they had their mandated 8 hours of rest, the northbound train had to leave late.
leighant said: "Sorry, I couldn't get Trains website to give me the icon to load an image directly. Sometimes I can get it, sometimes not. Don't know why..."
I take it you are using IE as your browser. I have the same problem here with mine. Someone on one of the threads advised me to "refresh" the page after the comment/reply page came up. It works for me every time.
Remember its your railroad
Allan
Track to the BRVRR Website: http://www.brvrr.com/