A few years earlier some of the Boston cars would have been handled via the B&M and Rotterdam Jct.
rcdrye A few years earlier some of the Boston cars would have been handled via the B&M and Rotterdam Jct.
Now, what road or roads carried the cars to/from St. Louis?
Johnny
I guess, again the Wabash. Why not? But by NY, do you mean Weehawken, with a ferry to W42nd St.?
Yes, Dave, it was the Wabash that carried the through sleepers between Buffalo and St. Louis.
As to "New York," the West Shore, Erie, Lackawanna, and B&O all listed, in the description of the equipment of trains, New York as the origin or destination of their trains.
Considering that Mark gave a listing of the through equipment from his information, he has first stab at a new question.
In the summer of 1916, the through equipment had changed, with additions to and subtractions from Mark 's list.
No. 1, the Continental Limited had sleeping cars from New York to Chicago and Boston (B&M) to Chicago via the Wabash, New York to St. Louis, also via the Wabash, and a tourist sleeping car Boston (B&M) to Chicago via the Nickel Plate on TTSa and via the Wabash on MWF.
No. 23, the Buffalo Express, had a sleeping car New York to St. Louis via the Wabash, and sleeping cars Boston (B&M) and Chicago via the Nickel Plate.
No. 4, the Continental Limited, had sleeping cars Chicago to Boston (B&M) and to New York, via the Wabash, and tourist sleeping cars Chicago to Boston (B&M) via the Wabash (MThSa) and the Nickel Plate (MWF).
No. 6, the West Shore Express, had sleeping cars St. Louis to New York via Wabash, and Chicago to Boston (B&M) via the Nickel Plate.
Apparently, the NYC had a monopoly in New York-Buffalo sleeper service, since all of the West Shore's sleepers were interline.
Johnny:
You are correct that the NYC had New York-Buffalo Pullman service. Does the PRR service, coach from New York to Philadelphia with sleeping car from Philadelphia to Buffalo count? It was out of the way, but Buffalo, NY was one of the few places that the NYC/PRR cooperated.
Ed Burns
Ed, I was commenting on what seems to have been the New York Central's monopoly on local sleeperservice that went up along the Hudson, and so the West Shore, which was in the New York Central Lines, did not have such service (even though it had an overnight train between Weehawken (ferry from 42nd Street and from Cortlandt Street) and Buffalo.
You are right---I would rather board a Pullman in New York City to Buffalo than take a train to Philadelphia and transfer to another train.
763-234-9306
Happily retired NP-BN-BNSF from Minneapolis
The PRR did compete with the Central in NY - Detroit overnight business. The PRR's Red Arrow was a fine train, but coaches and sleepers, whereas the NYC had both an all-Pullman ovenright, and the overnight Wolverine which had coaches and sleepers and continued to Chicago. In the post-WWII era I found the overnight coaches on the PRR more comfortable than those on the Central. Sleeper patrons had more choices on the PRR, with the Creek-series cars, single bedrooms or duplex roomettes, whatever they were called, intermediate between a roomette and a double bedroom and very comfortable.
In the early 1900's the New York Central Lines consisted of 22 different railroads ranging from the 3128 mile New York Central & Hudson River RR to the 2 mile Fulton Chain Ry. Prior to 1920 the NYC sold its interests in two of these railroads that operated for decades afterwards under their own names with which we're all familiar. The NYC retained controlling interest in two three other well known railroads which were never merged into the NYC System but went on to operate as independent roads into the 1970's. Name all four five of these railroads.
Mark
Three with controling interest are Iindiana Harbor Belt, Pittsburgh and Lake Erie, and Toronto, Hamiltoon & Buffalo. Sold Peoria and Pekin Union? In 1932 it sold the street trackage of the New York and Harlem to New York Railways. I will look for some more..
The Rutland operated as part of NYC Lines until about 1915. NYC influence in locomotive and caboose design stuck around a bit longer.
daveklepper Three with controling interest are Iindiana Harbor Belt, Pittsburgh and Lake Erie, and Toronto, Hamiltoon & Buffalo. Sold Peoria and Pekin Union? In 1932 it sold the street trackage of the New York and Harlem to New York Railways. I will look for some more.
Three with controling interest are Iindiana Harbor Belt, Pittsburgh and Lake Erie, and Toronto, Hamiltoon & Buffalo. Sold Peoria and Pekin Union? In 1932 it sold the street trackage of the New York and Harlem to New York Railways. I will look for some more.
The IHB, P&LE and TH&B are correct. As far as I know the NYC never owned or controlled the P&PU. I believe you are thinking of the Peoria & Eastern which was a subsidiary of the Big Four. Rob has also correctly identified the Rutland. One more road remains to be identified before I will declare a winner. I was surprised to learn this remaining road had for a time been one of the NYC Lines.
I know the Alton was once owned bny the B&O. Could it have been once owned by the Central?
What about the Kankikee Belt?
The Clinchfield?
Neither the Alton nor the Clinchfield were ever owned by the NYC. The Kankakee Belt Route was a nickname and marketing name used by the NYC for the Illinois Division line between South Bend and Zearing, IL. It remained a part of the NYC into the PC era. The last line we are looking for was a major east-west railroad that lasted for decades after the NYC sold its interest in the line. Its familiar name was the same during and pre and post NYC ownership.
Lake Erie and Western. Later (1922) ended up in the NKP camp.
KCSfanThe Kankakee Belt Route was a nickname and marketing name used by the NYC for the Illinois Division line between South Bend and Zearing, IL
The Illinois Division was part of the Indiana Illinois and Iowa (Three I), which was a subsidiary of the Big Four (CCC&StL).
I will defer to RC if it is OK, because the three railroads I listed were pretty well known as to their ownership, and the two that RC listed as sold before 1920 were far more obscure concerning their NYC ownership.
I suppose the NYC sold the Rutland because they wished the D&H to be a friendly connection.
The Rutland was in the NYC camp primarily because of Alexandra Vanderbilt's husband Dr William Seward Webb, who wanted to be a governer (of Vermont or New York, he didn't seem to really care). After he failed in that the NYC kind of lost interest in the Rutland and sold most of their holdings under threat of the Sherman Anti-Trust act. The only thing Vermont got out of it in the end was the Shelburne Museum, which was set up by Webb's daughter Electra. At least two Vermont governors had previously been President of the Vermont Central (later Central Vermont), which had also controlled the Rutland for a period of time.
The last residue of NYC control of the Rutland (besides equipment classes and appearance) were the NYC's trackage rights from Norwood NY to Malone Jct NY, which lasted longer than the Rutland itself.
An overnight train jointly operated by two carriers famous for fast streamined trains carried heavyweight Pullmans rebuilt and renamed for the carriers' famous fleets. Endpoints, RRs, handoff city and (if you can...) car names.
Rob, you deserve partial credit for naming the LE&W which was a NYC line until it was acquired by the NKP in 1922 after which it lost its individual identity and became the LE&W District of the NKP. The New York Chicago and St. Louis itself was the remaining road I was looking for. The NYC&StL was acquired by the Lake Shore and Michigan Southern in 1882 and remained in the NYC family until 1916 when it was sold to the Van Sweringen Brothers of Cleveland. The sale was prompted by the federal government advising the NYC that its ownership of both the Nickle Plate and LS&MS was a violation of the anti trust laws. The Van Sweringens originally wanted the Nickle Plate only for its right of way in the Cleveland area for use by their Shaker Heights and other traction lines but after acquiring it realized the value of the entire railroad.
The next question is yours.
I can't think why I only found the LE&W and forgot the NYC & St. L. My wife's family is from Cleveland where Oris P. and Mantis J. Van Sweringen are legendary. NKP's longstanding arrangement with the DL&W for New York bound traffic was an afterthought during its construction when the intent was to connect to the West Shore. I'm sure the NYC system acquired it for the same reasons.
So here's the repost of the new question:
This sounds like the Zephyr Rocket, which went into service in 1941 between St. Louis and Minneapolis. Apparently, the original sleepers were two in the Tower series, which had 8 sections, 3 double bedrooms, and 1 drawing room. Pullman rebuilt two cars to Plan 4090-, and they were named Zephyr Tower and Rocket Tower. The junction was a Burlington, Iowa.
Rocket Tower was originally Costella Peak, and Zephyr Tower was originally Teton Peak. Both were originally built in Lot 6213, 10 section & 2 drawing rooms; in December 19280January 1929; Costella Peak was built for service on the Twentieth Century Limited, and Teton Peak was built for general service. They were both rebuilt in July of 1941..
Another quick and completely correct answer. Burlington and Rock Island each supplied a complete trainset, except Rock Island supplied both lounge-observations. Like many heavyweights assigned to otherwise lightweight trains, the two Tower cars were painted to match, in this case plain silver.
Interesting to me is that both the Burlington and the Rock Island ends were out of their main territories. Burlington was a bit player in St Louis, RI in the twin cities. The Z-R originated in RIs and later CMStP&P's station in Minneapolis.
Since this will probably be my last post this year I want to let all you forum participants know what a pleasure it's been. Looking forward to many more years swapping minuitae with all of you! (My wife's comment: "Not too many people care about this stuff, but those who care, really care!")
The reference to the names of the two rebuilt cars provided the clue. Using Kratville's Passenger Car Catalog and Wayner's Pullman Panorama Volume 1 (did publish a second volume?), I found the details of the two cars. The rest was easy.
I, too have enjoyed the exchange of information concerning railroading in the past, and hope to continue for many years this exchange with the dinosaurs and the young whippersnappers.
New question: even though Pullman built more 12 section-drawing cars than any other arrangement, the company built quite a variety of all-room heavyweights, including those that also had lounge, dining, and/or observation facilities. I have counted 22 different arrangements built 1911-1931, 7 of which had rooms only. Name as many as you can.
Happy New Year to you all!
Back early, I guess...
Johnny's question intrigued me enough to dig. I was surprised at how few groups of all-room cars with no lounge accomodations there were - though the total number of cars without lounges is slightly larger. Johnny found seven types with rooms only, I only found eight.
From the 1950 Pullman Company List of Cars (reprinted by Wayner Publications) here are the all-room heavywight diagram numbers for Pullmans built before the lightweight era. Diagram numbers between 1 and 99, plan numbers in the 2000 and 3000 series are either as-built heavyweights or rebuilds before 1937. Some cars with 1-99 diagram numbers are lightweights with heavyweight floor plans (ex. 8 Sect 2 DBR 2 Cpt) which have 4000 series plan numbers.
DR=Drawing Room SBR=Single Bedroom DBR=Double Bedroom, Cpt=Compartment
Buf=Buffet Din= Diner Lge=Lounge Obs=Observation (no distinction between solarium and open platform) Dup SBR= Duplex Single Bedroom
12 3DBR 2DR Buf Lge
16 6DBR Lge
29 1 DR 1 Cpt Lge
31 8 SBR Lge
35 10 CPT
36 14 SBR
37 1 DR 2 DBR 2 Cpt 2 SBR Lge
38 5 Cpt Lge
39 6 SBR Din Lge
40,47,53 7 Cpt 2 DR
42 7 Cpt Lge Obs
43 7 Cpt Buf Lge
50 1 Dr 2 Cpt Lge Obs
51 2 Cpt 1 DR Lge, Buf Lge Obs (not a typo... lists two different lounge sections)
52 1 Cpt 1 DR Buf Lge Obs
57,58,64 3 Cpt 2 DR Lge Obs
59 6 Rmt 5 DBR 2 Cpt (This is probably a rebuild)
60 3 Cpt 1 DR Buf Lge Obs
68 4 Cpt 1 DR Lge Obs (Canadian Pacific owned)
69 3 DR 3 Cpt Lge
70 4 DR 4 Cpt
71 1 DR 1 SBR Buf Lge Obs
75,80,81,82,83 6 Cpt 3 DR (variations on paired rooms)
89 16 Dup SBR (Eventide and Nocturne )
97 1Dr 1 Cpt 3 DBR Bft Lge Obs
99 6 SBR 2 DBR Lge Obs
The following are rebuilds - 3000 series plans and 300 or 400 series diagram numbers
(100 series are Parlor, 200 lightweights. Some Lightweights with sections had lower 1-99 plan numbers)
355 1 DR 2 Cpt 3SBR Lge Obs
356,365,369,370,371,389 1 Dr 1 Cpt Buf Lge Obs
374,375,376 1 DR 1 SBR Buf Lge Smoking Lge
378, 433, 435 1 DR 2 Cpt Buf Lge Obs
381 2 Cpt 3 SBR 1 DR Buf Lge Obs
438, 439 3 Cpt 1 DR Lge Obs
453 3 Cpt 2 DR Lge
Well, well, well (and this is not intended to be three holes in the ground). You have found 13 that are not listed in Pullman Panorama Volume 1--and I found 12 in that book that you did not find. I did not specify that rebuilds were not counted, so Eventide and Nocturne are allowable (rebuilt from Seaside Park and Adair, composite baggage and club smoking (buffet) cars.
The common findings are: 10 C, 14 SBR, 7C 2 DR, 7C Lge Obs, 2C 1 DR L BLO, 1C 1DR BLO, 3C 2DR LO,3C 1DR BLO, 1DR 1SBR BLO, and 1C 3DR.
I found and you did not: 6C LO, 8C LO, 4C 2DR LO, 7DR, 2DR 1C LO, 2C, 3DR 2 Private Room (How they differed is not stated), 6SBR Café Lge, 3SBR 2C 1DR BLO, 6SBR BLO, 4SBR2C 1DR L, and 13 DBR.
Quite a variety, is it not? Since it is noted in the Wayner book I have that certain cars were built for certain roads, I imagine that some of these variations were specified by the roads that they were built for. I wonder: were some of the cars built with sun rooms rather than open deck observations because of the higher speeds that came into practice?
You and I looked in slightly different eras - I was looking at a list 20 years after yours. My list was done from the diagram numbers - I looked in vain for a diagram 12 car. Maybe the most interesting to me was the number of variations on the 6Cpt 3DR car - there was even a diagram number reserved for a "virtual" car in case the actual car assigned was unknown.
So here's the new question: Though several carriers had lightweight and heavyweight parlor cars in service at the same time, even operated by Pullman, only one had open-platform heavyweight parlor-observation and dome-parlor observation cars operated by Pullman at the same time. For extra credit name the railroad that operated its own open-platform heavyweight parlor-observation and dome-parlor observation cars at the same time.
Rob:
I am thinking of the Wabash. "Trains" had picture or write up about this. Is the car the "Helena Mojeski" (may have spelled that wrong).
Yup; lightweight dome parlor observation on the Bluebird, and open platform observation on the Detroit-St. Louis train.
In general,, solareums were favored by northern railroads in cold climates (heavywieght Empire Buiilder as example), and open platforms in milder climates.
OK... Ed gets the next question. Wabash had Budd-built car 1601 on the Blue Bird (Dome Parlor Obs, Pullman operated) as well as the famous "Helena Modjeska" open platform parlor obs (also Pullman operated) which ran into the 1960s on the Banner Blue. Both trains ran Chicago-St. Louis.
Not to hold up the thread - but nobody tried for the railroad-operated parlor answer. Actually I'm surprised Ed didn't get it but the overlap was very short. CB&Q took delivery of its first dome equipped Zephyrs in 1947, including a pair of dome parlor observations, a year or two before it retired its last open platform parlors, which may have been out of service for some time before that. Burlington had operated solariums on some of its first-string trains since around 1930- like most railroads equipment on secondary trains suffered from benign neglect.
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