ATSF rebuilt 2-10-2s into 2-10-10-2s in Topeka in 1911. The other road which had the same wheel arrangement was the Virginian. Those were constructed new by Alco.
If I am correct please ask another question as I will be off line for a while.
Of course I knew that PRR's electrification was RFC financed - I just didn't connect the dots.
Going from small to large... In 1911 the largest locomotives built up to that time were built in company shops, the series one of only two of that wheel arrangement (the second came later for another railroad, and was larger still). Not particularly successful, all members of the class were cut down to a different wheel arrangement of an obvious name in this case. The other series of the original wheel arrangement was successful enough to last to dieselization.
Name the railroad that built the 1911 series (and the shops, if you can), and the type to which they were rebuilt. The name of the other railroad owning locomotives of the original wheel arrangement is optional.
100% correct. Yes, the PRR proceded to dsign a high-speed Atlantic for the NY-Washington service, (Manhattan Transfer - Washington) after they learned of the Burlington's plans for the Pioneer Zephyr and the UP M-1000. The only item you missed is the USA Federal anti-Depression Reconstruction Finance loan for electrification, which also cancelled serial production of the K5, which would have run head-to-head with the Central's Hudsons. The CP Jubilee 4-4-4 was a similar approach, as well as the Milwaukee's modern 4-4-2 that you mentioned. And these were successsful for their intended purposes. I think the B&O 4-4-4 never got beyond one prototype, but it did get used. Dieselisation was early on the B&O.
Look forward to your question.
So... Did PRR design an E8 similar to Milwakee's "A" class atlantics? The timing on this would put it near either the 1933/34 Chicago or 1939/40 New York world's fairs. I can't come up with anything government sponsored in the right era. The Milwaukee's A class was pretty successful - enough so that the traffic outgrew its capabilities and it was replaced in Chicago-Twin Cities service by the F class hudsons. Even at that the A class remained in service on the Midwest Hiawatha until replaced by diesels. I suppose a high speed New York-Washington train may have been thought of, but powering it with steam surely was dropped once the decision to electrify was reached in 1933.
Both B&O and Canadian Pacific had 4-4-4's intended for high speed service, which were at least somewhat successful.
The EMC model I presume is Rock Island's TA, a single unit 1200 HP power car for Rock Island's very lightweight prewar streamliners.
rc you had the right railroad, and the above has enough hints for you to give a complete and thorough answer and possibly add some more information.
1. There was no government project that facilitated the Penn Station project, the PRR did it on their own, and the Penn Station project preceded the E6s. Indeed, the Penn Station project necessitated the steel cars, making the E2 and E3 Atllantics not powerful enough for trains of the new steel cars, which the E6 could handle. Some E2s and E3s were modernized after construction of the E6s (prototype 1910, fleet 1914) to become E7s (larger cylinders, piston valves replacing slide valves, superheat, but keeping Stephenson valve motion, making them essentially E5s except for the valve motion), but were still light Atlantics, not heavy Atlantics. A PRR E8 would come after the E6s and E7s, logically. So continue.
2. EMD (or possibly EMC, at the time) did build a diesel-electric (for one railroad only) that would have been a logical competitor for the E8, but I think with regard to performance, not economy or maintenace, this E8 would have done a better job, much as a single K4 or NYCJ1 Hudsonover a single EMD E7 unit.
The concept of this E8 was successsful, for a time, exactly on one different railroad, and approximately on another. But only for a time. And these two analogies were well-known famous locomotives. A third railroad had one similar to the second as an experiment only.
3. There was never an electrification from NY to Philadelphia per se. The main line was electrified Trenton - Wilmington as part of the Philadelphia suburban electrificaiton, but of course to main-line standards. Then the AC electrification was extended north to Sunnyside Yard, with the Hell Gate Bridge elecrification just a few years later. For a while, the electric-steam change was at Wilmington (and Paoli for trains to and from Pittsburgh). Then came Washington and Potomic Yard, and then Harrisburg and Enola, from Paoli. Finally, "The Port Road."
4. Sometime after the project that negated construction of the E8, business increased to the point where it would still not have been powerful enough for most of the service for which it was designed, even if the project had not been put through. As did in fact happen with the two analogy locomotives on the two other railroads, without anything like the major project for the routes these two analogous locomotives`had as their purpose. But they did continue to be used on branch lines, much as the E6 was later used on the PRR.
My first guess would be the Pennsylvania, which had E-class atlantics up through E7. My guess would be that the Penn Station project, and with it steel cars, both exceeded its capacity, and reduced its value, since the electric run across the meadows cut 9 miles off the steam run from Jersey City to Philadelphia.
Lots of EMD E8 were built, for possibly about twelve or more railroads, not as many as E7s, but more than E9s, the last in the series.
There was another E8. It was fully designed but never built. Who, what, where to be used, why not built--- major railroad item and major USA item that made the railroad item possible. Give a good guess as to how many would have been built to meet its operating environment.
Any idea where the idea was or could have been realized?
It's definitely your turn, Dave. The question was only for the line name and the carriers. The rest was just "bonus material".
Did not know about the mail train. Do know that CV crews operated into Montreal on the Ambassador and M/W.
Should I ask the next or do you wish to do so?
"Normal" CV trains south from Brattleboro to New London used the paired track arrangement, dispatched both ways by B&M. The odd train out was listed under the B&M's trains and was the mail train that served the town of Vernon, Vermont. Because it was a pool operation it often drew a CV locomotive and crew, which would operate over the B&M from East Northfield MA to Springfield MA.
Trains that used the route included the Ambassador, from Grand Central to Montreal, and the Montrealer northbound and Washingtonian southbound. B&M crews Springfield - White River Junction and CV crews north of there. The B&M Cheshire, Boston - White River Junction, used the line Bellows Falls - White River Junnction. The White Montains Day Express, with B&M crews, ran Grand Central - Berlin, NH. When the Red Wing had a NY section, to and from Montreal, B&M crews handled it. B&M-CP interchange was at Wells River Jc., north of White River Jc., but south of Berlin, NH. The Vermonter is the Amtrak passenger train on the route today, Washington - Burlington, VT.
Without doing further reserch, this is about it. Should I provide more information or ask the next question?
I think the last CV passenger service, from New London to WRJ was a doodlebug.
Yes, it's the Conn River Line. From north to south CV owned from White River Jct to Windsor VT, B&M to Bellows Falls VT (Sullivan RR, through Sullivan County NH) and Brattleboro VT (Vermont Valley). B&M's line from Brattleboro to East Northfield MA crossed the river into New Hampshire and back. CV's line (originally Vermont Valley) ran (and still runs) on the west side of the river. B&M's line closed as a through route in 1970 when a bridge abutment failed, and the remnant was abandoned in 1986 after a period of lease by Green Mountain Ry. All else passed into the hands of Central Vermont in 1987 and New England Central in 2005.
Is it the Connecticut River Line, operated by both the Boston and Maine and the Central Vermont? If so, I will be back with additional information.
On a line that was jointly operated by two railroads there was a section about 9 miles long where one railroad was used in one direction on one side of the river, and the other in the other. The first railroad operated most of the passenger trains, the second only a few, and only on one end. The exception to this pattern was a jointly operated train that ran end to end on the joint line, operating both ways on the second railroad's line along the river. As a result of this the second railroad's engines and crews were regularly seen in the jointly operated train's terminal, even though it was off line.
Name both railroads and the common name of the joint line. Special credit for getting the ends of the paired track section and the joint train's terminal city. Masters' points for figuring out why the train ran against traffic one way on the paired track.
Your question RC, and thanks for the additional information, NP-Edie.
Rob and All:
The NP favored the SP for the freight traffic between those two roads and the GN favored the WP.
One part of ancient history is this: I started on the NP in April, 1966 as a yard clerk at Northtown. Any revenue traffic routed NP Portland SP was actually interchanged to the SPS at Pasco, with the SPS forwarding those cars to the SP at Portland. I suspect Pasco had a seperate track for the SP block. Coding for the cars were "1721SP (or after 1968) 12143SP. 1721 was the NP station number for Pasco and 12143 became the new station number to reflect the upcoming merger. Cars for the SPS proper were 1721SS or 12143SS. All NP SPS freight traffic was interchanged at Pasco unless specifically junctioned at Spokane. As information, NP company for Portland was taken to Seattle and placed on an NP train for Portland.
Lots of history. Any questions, call me.
This sounds like the Inside gateway line of the GN(SP&S) and WP completed in 1931. The SP&S's Oregon Trunk built the section from Wishram Washington on the Columbia River southward to Bend Oregon in competition (and later cooperation) with Union Pacifics Deschutes Railroad. GN Continued the line south from Bend to Klamath Falls Oregon. The junction point between GN and WP was and is Bieber CA, in the middle of nowhere about 80 miles south of Klamath Falls Oregon and 60 miles east of Redding CA. Still important to successor BNSF, which has traffic rights over WP successor UP's Feather River route. SP had previously had a virtual monopoly on freight traffic from California to Oregon and Washington. Through a variety of trackage rights agreements and swaps both UP and BNSF operate trains there, though most of UP's traffic goes via the ex-SP Cascade route further west.
I believe the C&O bought those RF&P Pacifics as stop-gap while their own top-of-the-line Pacifics were being rebuilt into Hudsons.
My question: Name and give all details on a major railroad line constructed by two railroads, both Class !s at the time, built from each end with an agreed-upon meeting point that today is still the junction between two of the majors. This line was built fairly late in the era of major railroad construction and effectively broke a major monopoly in frieght traffic. It is still important today, used by two railroads, but of importance only to one of the two.
Yep! Your question, sir.
C&O?
Well Dave, you got the RF&P right (had to give my home road a plug) and the 4-8-4 power upgrade, but the Pacifics went elsewhere. Anybody got that part?
I think you mean the RF&P, with 4-8-4's the immediate new power. Their modern Pacifics probably went to SAL.
Thanks, Dave. After I posted my reply, I came across a photo of a B&M Pacific in Montreal! There was also a picture of a B&M Mountain on the East Wind.
This road's roster was heavy with Pacifics, acquired from the early 20th century through the 1920's. They ranged from slide valve equipped lightweights up to large, heavy-duty types and were used for both passenger and freight. Their newest examples were sold to a connecting road after larger steam power was bought.
Name this line, the connecting road which bought the large Pacifics from them and the type of power which led to these Pacifics being sold.
100% And you covered all basies except to possibly mention that the only foreign passenger power that was not of the Pacific type belonged to the Rutland. Its 4-8-2's ran regularly over the B&M into Troy. Also, B&M shared power on through runs with the CP, also Pacifics. Next question please.
I'm going to go with the DL&W acquiring Hudsons and selling some of it's Pacifics to the B&M, who was acquiring new, big Pacifics, one of which has been the subject of a very long restoration effort by Steamtown. B&M often shared power in run through service with both the Maine Central and the Rutland. I'm guessing the one important train you refer to is the vest pocket diesel streamliner, the "Flying Yankee". B&M also had a lot of branches which would not tolerate power as big as their Pacifics. These lines utilized rebuilt Moguls, Consolidations, a few Atlantics and some classy Americans. Their ten-wheelers played out prior to the war.
One railroad has some fairly modern Pacifics, then bought some Hudsons, and then sold some of its heaviest Pacifics to another railroad, that was also buying new Pacifics while other railroads were buying Hudsons. The second railroad used both its new Pacifics and the second-hand Pacifics for all its most important trains except for one train. (Foreign power did visit, also generally Pacifics.) And these Pacifics regularly ran through on neighboring railroads in through passenger service. They were too heavy for bridges on certain lines, where passenger service was powered by lighter and older steam power. The selling railroad generally used its new Hudsons on its best trains, but also used heavier power. And it retained a large Pacific fleet as well.
Massive dieselization of road passenger power did not start on either railroad until WWII. Both railroads had passenger service of one sort or another up to Amtrak and saw passenger trains afterward.
Dave had it (with a little more info). The cars were actually painted at Wisconsin Central's Fond Du Lac WI shops (WC had been leased by MSPSSteM since 1909) and about half of them were on WC equipment trust certificates. The large lettering eventually made it to the sides of locomotives after the 1960 MSPSSteM/WC/DSS&A merger that created the Soo Line Railroad. The "New Soo" used the large lettering along with a color band for "Colormark" specialized cars, a program that began in 1965.
har, that sounds like my Rabbi!
It would be Minneapolis, St. Paul and SAULT STE. MARIE. (Francais , please). In french, a "sault" is a place in the river of tumbling rapids.
MINNEAPOLIS SAINT PAUL AND SAULT SAINT MARIE (SP?)
Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!
Get the Classic Trains twice-monthly newsletter