Trains.com

Classic Train Questions Part Deux (50 Years or Older)

856747 views
8197 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 2,535 posts
Posted by KCSfan on Saturday, April 25, 2015 3:58 PM

Monon - Hoosier and Tippecanoe

Mark

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 5,017 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Sunday, April 26, 2015 12:25 PM

The Hoosier and Tippecanoe were each named after ONE end of their run.  The first-class cars on these trains were anmed after BOTH ends, with each train getting one of the cars. Both trainsets served the same endpoints.

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 2,535 posts
Posted by KCSfan on Monday, April 27, 2015 4:55 AM

C&EI - Meadowlark and Whipperwill

Mark

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 5,017 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Monday, April 27, 2015 6:09 AM

I made a small mistake in posting the original question. Initially the train sets each made 1 1/2 round trips per day (giving three round trips with the same train names), though the service was cut back to two round trips only a couple of years after it was inaugurated.  Each train set's first class car was named after one of the endpoints.  The cars were carried in the same trains after the service was cut back to a single round trip, and even operated briefly on the Amtrak service of the same name.  The train name described a characteristic of the service, shared with one other train pair operated by the same railroad.

  • Member since
    June 2011
  • 1,002 posts
Posted by NP Eddie on Monday, April 27, 2015 9:08 AM

Rob:

GN's "International" trains with the "Port of Seattle" and "Port of Vancouver". The second part of the question should be the "Winnpeg Limited".

Ed Burns

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 5,017 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Monday, April 27, 2015 10:13 AM

Ed has the answer.  The common part with the "Winnipeg Limited" is that the "Streamlined International" was international as well.  The two observation cars were used on the "International" until 1971. Both were bought by Amtrak in the second wave of equipment, and used briefly on the "International" when it was started again in 1972, before ending their careers in Milwaukee-Chicago-St. Louis service.

  • Member since
    June 2011
  • 1,002 posts
Posted by NP Eddie on Monday, April 27, 2015 8:04 PM

Rob and All:

The BN merger was in 1970.  They repainted about 25 passenger cars before discontinuing the project. What was the reason for that and how many heavyweight cars were repainted? Numbers of those cars are optional.

Ed Burns.

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Monday, April 27, 2015 9:27 PM

They did not need to repaint any stainless steel cars.  The NP and GN had painted lightwieghts that were repainted into BN green, and the program was halted because of the pending AT&SF to BNSF merger, but I believe the only heavyweight cars repainted were their business cars.  I do not know how many or what their numbers were, but other than business cars, they would only have repainted liightwieghts  -or heavyweights repainted for MoW duty.

  • Member since
    June 2011
  • 1,002 posts
Posted by NP Eddie on Monday, April 27, 2015 9:46 PM

Dave:

Not even close. Think 1970 and not the 1995/6 merger of the BN and ATSF.

Ed Burns

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 5,017 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Tuesday, April 28, 2015 6:49 AM

I would guess the heavyweights were for the last storage mail contracts, and repainting stopped when the contracts were dropped.  The renumbering and repainting of other cars stopped in early 1971, after NRPC (Amtrak) ID'd the cars it wanted.

  • Member since
    June 2011
  • 1,002 posts
Posted by NP Eddie on Tuesday, April 28, 2015 10:03 AM

Rob:

You win. The two heavyweight repaints probably were in a shop or someone elected to have them repainted. To the best of my knowledge, the storage mail contracts were done in 1967. You are correct that Amtrak's coming prompted the BN to discontinue repainting passenger cars.  "Car Names, Numbers, and Consists" has the information on BN passenger cars. Business cars were repainted as planned. I started chasing trains in the late 1950's and remember old NP baggage/storage mail cars that were not repainted Lowey green.

Next question to you.

Ed Burns

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 5,017 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Tuesday, April 28, 2015 11:21 AM

The Lackawanna had two electrifications, the suburban one in New Jersey and another one in a different state.  Name the other state.

  • Member since
    October 2012
  • 225 posts
Posted by DS4-4-1000 on Tuesday, April 28, 2015 1:24 PM

rcdrye

The Lackawanna had two electrifications, the suburban one in New Jersey and another one in a different state.  Name the other state.

 
The state would be New York, the city of Brooklyn.
  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Tuesday, April 28, 2015 2:10 PM

As far as I know, the DL&W did not own any track in Brooklyn.  Possibly a small yard in Manhattan reached by carfloat.  But I am willing to learn if there was such a yard in Brooklyn.   

I would guess it was an upstate NY interurban line, possibly one running into the Rochester subway for a short while, and possibly once a regular branchline.

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 5,017 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Wednesday, April 29, 2015 7:23 AM

DS-4-4-1000 has the correct answer.  GE built 30-ton inside-frame-trucked number 4001 in 1926 for DL&W's Wallabout Terminal carfloat operation in the Williamsburg section of Brooklyn. It was the only electric offline float yard in the New York Harbor (NYNH&H and LIRR were "online").  It lasted until 1941, when the Navy Department took it over to expand the Navy Yard.  4001 was 600V, pantograph equipped, and was sold to the Shawinigan Falls Ry in Canada in 1942.   DL&W used float stations in Manhattan, so they didn't need a locomotive there.  GE built three inside-frame-trucked steeple cabs, the other two ended up on the Hutchinson and Northern in Kansas.

  • Member since
    October 2012
  • 225 posts
Posted by DS4-4-1000 on Wednesday, April 29, 2015 7:25 AM

daveklepper

As far as I know, the DL&W did not own any track in Brooklyn.  Possibly a small yard in Manhattan reached by carfloat.  But I am willing to learn if there was such a yard in Brooklyn.   

I would guess it was an upstate NY interurban line, possibly one running into the Rochester subway for a short while, and possibly once a regular branchline.

There are some photos on this website
 
DL&W also had another Brooklyn yard which was dieselized first with AGEIR boxcabs and later with GE 44 tonners.
  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Wednesday, April 29, 2015 4:32 PM

ut not electrified      that yard may have connected with tracks of the south brooklyn, but it was their electrification, not the DL&W's.

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 5,017 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Wednesday, April 29, 2015 4:33 PM

I mis-weighed 4001 as a 30 tonner.  Both GE roster notes and DL&W roster notes show a weight of around 50 tons.

Look forward to your question, DS-4-4-1000 !

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Wednesday, April 29, 2015 4:41 PM

when was the 4001 built and what steam was used previously?

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 5,017 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Wednesday, April 29, 2015 7:43 PM

Follow the links DS-4-4-1000 posted earlier in the forum.  4001 was built by GE in 1926 at Erie.  The trainweb link discusses what steam may have been used there.

Here's the link again:

http://members.trainweb.com/bedt/indloco/dlwwallaboutterm.html#Roster

  • Member since
    October 2012
  • 225 posts
Posted by DS4-4-1000 on Thursday, April 30, 2015 7:58 AM

New York Central and its affiliates had three separate electrifications where the locomotives were lettered for the New York Central.  What were the locations.  Extra points if you can name the electrification in which New York Central was partial owner and the locomotives were not lettered for the NYC.

  • Member since
    October 2012
  • 225 posts
Posted by DS4-4-1000 on Thursday, April 30, 2015 8:02 AM

daveklepper

ut not electrified      that yard may have connected with tracks of the south brooklyn, but it was their electrification, not the DL&W's.

I did not mean to imply that the second yard was electrified.  You had stated that you were unaware of any DL&W Brooklyn yard so I included it for information only.
  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Thursday, April 30, 2015 9:06 AM

You are absolutely correcdt, and I both apologize and thank you for the information.   I wonder if the South Brooklyn Lackawanna yard did have a track connection with the South Brooklyn tracks on 2nd Avenue.  Clearly the electrified Williamsburgh yard was isolated, accessable only by car float.  I thank all of you for giving me an insite on a part of NYC railroading that was not known to me, despite my teenage explorations.  I found the website history fascinating and passed it on to trolleyfans. One already thanked me.

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Thursday, April 30, 2015 10:01 AM

DS4-4-1000

New York Central and its affiliates had three separate electrifications where the locomotives were lettered for the New York Central.  What were the locations.  Extra points if you can name the electrification in which New York Central was partial owner and the locomotives were not lettered for the NYC. 

I will say New York suburban zone, Detroit River Tunnel and Cleveland Union Terminal. The fourth electrification is Niagara Junction.

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Thursday, April 30, 2015 10:10 AM

And I think you are correct.

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 5,017 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Thursday, April 30, 2015 10:13 AM

NJ wasn't partly owned by NYC until after WWII.  The NYC had a stretch of West Shore track between Syracuse and Utica that was third rail equipped, but I don't think they used any locomotives there. CUT stuff was lettered for CUT, not NYC.

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Thursday, April 30, 2015 1:23 PM

so-  then,  CUT was the fourth, the partly owned electrification.   So we are still looking for the third, after Detroit Tunnel and GCT and enverons.   Who provided electric locomotives for the Rochester subway freight service?   WAs it the NYCentral?  After the interurbns quit and it became a local operation?

  • Member since
    October 2012
  • 225 posts
Posted by DS4-4-1000 on Thursday, April 30, 2015 1:31 PM

CSSHEGEWISCH
I will say New York suburban zone, Detroit River Tunnel and Cleveland Union Terminal. The fourth electrification is Niagara Junction.

You had the answer I was looking for, but I apparently was incorrect about how the CUT locomotives were lettered.  I thought that in the later days they were lettered "New York Central System" like the Michigan Central electrics, but I cannot find any evidence of that.  With my appologies to the group for the error you have the next question.

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 5,017 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Thursday, April 30, 2015 2:29 PM

CUT electrics became P-motors in the New York electification zone in the 1950s.

  • Member since
    July 2009
  • 574 posts
Posted by FlyingCrow on Friday, May 1, 2015 7:53 AM

As long as we are "somewhat" on the topic of Cleveland Union Terminal, I offer this download.   the dedication booklet from 1930 for CUT.   Interesting stuff.

In reality, only the NKP and NYC/ CCC&STL ever recieved the full benefit from CUT and provided the money to operate it.   Nevertheless, in the annals of RR structures and systems...it is an icon.

http://www.clevelandmemory.org/cut-coll/book/dedbk.pdf

 

AB Dean Jacksonville,FL

SUBSCRIBER & MEMBER LOGIN

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

FREE NEWSLETTER SIGNUP

Get the Classic Trains twice-monthly newsletter