General Discussion (Model Railroader)

user="last mountain & eastern hogger" An interesting side-bar to this is, we always talk about A-B-A and A-B-B-A sets in the lash-up.  But the Western Pacific for their frieght trains prefered to run A-A-A units and ran them all face forward. I never have run across a reason for this. I only assume that they had fewer "B" units and they were tied up with the CZ. then in later years they were probably able to sell off the "B" units and kept the head-end "A"s and ran them together. This still does not explain why they ran them all facing forward.   If anyone has the answer, would sure be glad to know. Johnboy out.......................

I honestly can't remember ever seeing a photo of an AAA lashup all facing forward - so I didn't get the impression that was the rule with WP.  I have casually followed the WP because it was the freight connection to the Rio Grande in the 70's and I had a college room mate in Sacramento who worked for the WP and his father and grandfather also worked for the WP.  WP had B units like any other RR and from what I can tell used ABA or ABBA lashups early on like the Rio Grande did and in the 1960's they mixed them up in all different configurations.  Its true at the end, there were only 4 A units left.  The fab 4 at the end ran typically with 3 units one direcction and the 4th facing the opposite way.  I don't have any WP books but have some magazine articles which include F unit photo's, like an article on the inside gateway etc. 

Hi,

To the best of my knowledge, only FTs had drawbars, and as indicated in earlier postings it was to allow reduced manpower (i.e. an FT A/B would be one loco and not two - requiring an additional crew).  Santa Fe used drawbars a lot in the earlier years but they were dropped later on (when the union agreements were made). 

Stewart FTs come with two sizes of drawbars, and you can order replacements from them.  I have also made a couple from a strip of styrene, basically about 2 inches by 1/4 inch with a hole in each end. 

Instead of drawbars, I would take advantage of the close coupling kits offered by KD, and to add to it, I would apply American Limited diagphrams to the locos.  By the way, you may have to experiment with the drawbar length, as a "too short" one may not allow the locos to make the sharper curves on your layout.

 ENJOY,

Mobilman44 

riogrande5761 wrote:

Flashwave wrote: because there wasn't a way to see out the back of one A, sets of Fs were treated as one engine on some roads, and didn't need a coupler because they'd never be comikng apart. There was never any mention of that in Strapac's book regarding Rio Grande's draw barred FT's.  However, F units were generally ran as AB or ABBA sets and mixing/matching power units didn't really get popular until the 1960's on the D&RGW.  However, some of Rio Grande's FT's were delivered with drawbars between the A and B unit, but after a few years, any such units were converted to automatic couplers.  I couldn't find any discussion of the union rules in that book so it must have been a magazine article relating it to the breaking up of power units and the draw bars.  No F3's, F7's or F9's were delivered to the Rio Grande with draw bars according to Strapac's book.  Least, I think I have that right. I've threatrened to drawbar lots of engines and cars due to less than steller couplers. Standard reply to coupler issues = KD's  ;)

Standard reply to KD #5s failing = Drawbars. (Ask me how I know.

May not be true for Rio. But in almost any F, when backing you had an as bad or worse veiw than you did in a steam loco

Sure, F units aren't friendly for backing up.  But I've never heard of that as a reason for using draw bars or read it in any publication, or book.

Standard reply to KD #5s failing = Drawbars. (Ask me how I know.

explain please - what you typed makes no sense.  Full sentences and explanations help.

riogrande5761 wrote:

May not be true for Rio. But in almost any F, when backing you had an as bad or worse veiw than you did in a steam loco Sure, F units aren't friendly for backing up.  But I've never heard of that as a reason for using draw bars or read it in any publication, or book. Standard reply to KD #5s failing = Drawbars. (Ask me how I know. explain please - what you typed makes no sense.  Full sentences and explanations help.

1) I was more refferring to the keeping as 1 loco

2)for that I was oplaying off our last few terms. I've been rolling fine up hills with a string o cars on the club layout, and then 5 or 6 cars with Kadee #5s on them decide they want to break away and hide in that tunnel at the base of the hill where it's almost impossible to fish them out and pushing with the remaining train to get them results in derailments. And after a few words more colorful than some schemes, I've threatened to reconnect those cars permantly with drawbars.

I'm one of the few oddites that has had as good or better luck with horn-hooks than Kadees.

The early FTcame draw-barr'd A + Bs.  1. Two diesels designed to sub for 1 steam freight .  2.to get around Union rules for both a fireman and engineer for each engine (then modified to each engine with Cab).

Santa Fe, with water problems west of the Continental Divide (and one of the first to use) odered all of theirs with individual coupling.

MODEL ENGINES, when Draw-barr'd, run tighter (no slack) together but lose flexibilty, - especially when transporting same (I had ABBB and ABBA FT lashups). 

Flshwave: When draw-barr'd in tunnels when one engine tips over, they ALL tip over.

riogrande5761: I nver have had a problem 'backing up' any F units except for 'Talgo' types. Where did I go wrong?

Don Gibson wrote:

The early FTcame draw-barr'd A + Bs.  1. Two diesels designed to sub for 1 steam freight .  2.to get around Union rules for both a fireman and engineer for each engine (then modified to each engine with Cab). Santa Fe, with water problems west of the Continental Divide (and one of the first to use) odered all of theirs with individual coupling. MODEL ENGINES, when Draw-barr'd, run tighter (no slack) together but lose flexibilty, - especially when transporting same (I had ABBB and ABBA FT lashups).  Flshwave: When draw-barr'd in tunnels when one engine tips over, they ALL tip over. riogrande5761: I nver have had a problem 'backing up' any F units except for 'Talgo' types. Where did I go wrong?

Which is about my luck anyway. sometimes I could swear I've ticked off the MR gods.

davidmbedard wrote:

Drawbars on F3 and later models is just silly.  There are plenty of ways to get scale coupling between these units. David B

Not silly at all. I have a number of F-unit AB sets, both F3s and F7s. I run with DCC and assigned the A&B units the same address, so I have no plans to run them as seperate units. The F7s are BLIs and Athearn Genesis, which came with diaphrams and properly spaced couplers. Not so with the P1K F3s. They had no diaphrams and the spacing was wrong. I added some inexpensive diaphrams and could have spent some additional bucks to get short shanked couplers that would allow them to close couple. But why when I can easily make a drawbar and get exactly the spacing I want. With the diaphrams, you can't tell if there is a coupler or a drawbar unless you look at it from below which I don't do. Using the home made drawbars was a practical solution. It saved me money and doesn't detract from their appearance at all.  

jecorbett wrote:

davidmbedard wrote: Drawbars on F3 and later models is just silly.  There are plenty of ways to get scale coupling between these units. David B Not silly at all. I have a number of F-unit AB sets, both F3s and F7s. I run with DCC and assigned the A&B units the same address, so I have no plans to run them as seperate units. The F7s are BLIs and Athearn Genesis, which came with diaphrams and properly spaced couplers. Not so with the P1K F3s. They had no diaphrams and the spacing was wrong. I added some inexpensive diaphrams and could have spent some additional bucks to get short shanked couplers that would allow them to close couple. But why when I can easily make a drawbar and get exactly the spacing I want. With the diaphrams, you can't tell if there is a coupler or a drawbar unless you look at it from below which I don't do. Using the home made drawbars was a practical solution. It saved me money and doesn't detract from their appearance at all.

That's great info and well writtten Jecorbett.  I would, however,  suggest that modelers check the prototypes. The photo I posted earlier shows my prototype, CB&Q, operated F3's without diaphragms.