Trains.com

Classic Train Questions Part Deux (50 Years or Older)

856720 views
8197 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    December 2001
  • 8,156 posts
Posted by henry6 on Monday, April 11, 2011 4:30 PM

Didn't this train start out as the Portland Rose then the City of Portland?

RIDEWITHMEHENRY is the name for our almost monthly day of riding trains and transit in either the NYCity or Philadelphia areas including all commuter lines, Amtrak, subways, light rail and trolleys, bus and ferries when warranted. No fees, just let us know you want to join the ride and pay your fares. Ask to be on our email list or find us on FB as RIDEWITHMEHENRY (all caps) to get descriptions of each outing.

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: FEC MP334
  • 961 posts
Posted by ZephyrOverland on Monday, April 11, 2011 3:20 PM

K4sPRR

Here's another wild guess the 1944 Furloughhee Challenger that was later called the Military Challenger and eventually before its demise in 1946 the Advanced Challenger?

Nope - what was the travel innovation the train names refer to?  Focus on civilian travel.  The answer approximates the time frame you gave.

  • Member since
    June 2009
  • From: Along the Big 4 in the Midwest
  • 536 posts
Posted by K4sPRR on Monday, April 11, 2011 1:57 PM

Here's another wild guess the 1944 Furloughhee Challenger that was later called the Military Challenger and eventually before its demise in 1946 the Advanced Challenger?

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: FEC MP334
  • 961 posts
Posted by ZephyrOverland on Monday, April 11, 2011 1:27 PM

daveklepper

I would point out that the City of San Francisco's multiple ownership simply repeated what had been standard for years on the Overland Limited, etc.   It was a non-articulated train, so individual coaches, sleepers, diners, and lounges were owned by individual railroads contributing to a common pool for the total service.   This was true of nearly all the Cities non-articulated trains, and for the CZ, Empire Builder, North Coast Limited, Golden State Rocket, etc.   I understand the Zephyr Rocket was an exception, with one set owned by the RI and one by the CB&Q without mixing equipment, at least at first.   This did not prevent the emblems of three railroads being applied to a specifically UP,, SP, or C&NW diesel locomotive.   I recall the lead MP diesel on the Colorado Eagle also having a DRG&W emblem as well as MP.

Dollar Dinner Limited?   (Wild guess)   Is this the right directioh?

Not really - look at my previous comment.  A typical passenger of the time would not have cared if the diner was from the C&NW and the lounge car was owned by SP.  The travel "innovation" I'm looking for affected the comfort of the passenger directly.  Was it more convenient?  It was supposed to be.

Another hint - This train was basically merged out of existence.

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Monday, April 11, 2011 11:24 AM

I would point out that the City of San Francisco's multiple ownership simply repeated what had been standard for years on the Overland Limited, etc.   It was a non-articulated train, so individual coaches, sleepers, diners, and lounges were owned by individual railroads contributing to a common pool for the total service.   This was true of nearly all the Cities non-articulated trains, and for the CZ, Empire Builder, North Coast Limited, Golden State Rocket, etc.   I understand the Zephyr Rocket was an exception, with one set owned by the RI and one by the CB&Q without mixing equipment, at least at first.   This did not prevent the emblems of three railroads being applied to a specifically UP,, SP, or C&NW diesel locomotive.   I recall the lead MP diesel on the Colorado Eagle also having a DRG&W emblem as well as MP.

Dollar Dinner Limited?   (Wild guess)   Is this the right directioh?

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: FEC MP334
  • 961 posts
Posted by ZephyrOverland on Monday, April 11, 2011 9:58 AM

narig01

City of San Francisco. Chicago - Oakland, Ca. Multiple ownership of a trainset . Finale City of everywhere. origins Chicago & St Louis _ Ogden(?) .  rgds ign

Nope - think of the travel innovation (and eventually the name) from the passengers point of view.

  • Member since
    November 2005
  • From: Hope, AR
  • 2,061 posts
Posted by narig01 on Monday, April 11, 2011 9:10 AM

City of San Francisco. Chicago - Oakland, Ca. Multiple ownership of a trainset . Finale City of everywhere. origins Chicago & St Louis _ Ogden(?) .  rgds ign

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: FEC MP334
  • 961 posts
Posted by ZephyrOverland on Sunday, April 10, 2011 6:58 AM

daveklepper

The UP bought the GM-Pullman Train of Tomorrow and used it as its contribution for Porftland - Seattle Pool Service.   I do not know if it retained the name "Train of Tomorrow" on the UP.   Probably they called it "Domeliner."   The CB&Q was operating its Silver Vista, the very first dome car, converted from a standard Budd coach and recognizable by the angular dome instead a dome with smooth curves, but that was just one car/   The UP train had several domes.

Officially the Train of Tomorrow consist was unnamed when it was operated in Seattle-Portland pool service. In fact, all the trains on that route were unnamed.  So this would not be it.

Another hint: I don't believe this train used any type of unusual equipment.

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Sunday, April 10, 2011 4:08 AM

The UP bought the GM-Pullman Train of Tomorrow and used it as its contribution for Porftland - Seattle Pool Service.   I do not know if it retained the name "Train of Tomorrow" on the UP.   Probably they called it "Domeliner."   The CB&Q was operating its Silver Vista, the very first dome car, converted from a standard Budd coach and recognizable by the angular dome instead a dome with smooth curves, but that was just one car/   The UP train had several domes.

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: FEC MP334
  • 961 posts
Posted by ZephyrOverland on Friday, April 8, 2011 10:29 AM

OK, here's the question.....

In 1935, the UP established the Challenger, a train that considered innovative because of the accommodations and services it offered.  A number of years later, the UP established another train with its name reflecting another travel innovation.  Give the name the train as it was originally named, the name at the end of its career, the endpoints, and what was the travel innovation the train was highlighting?

Hint: it wasn't the Aerotrain

 

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Thursday, April 7, 2011 9:09 AM

A good question and a worthwhile discussion.  I should have remembered the facts and done the right analysis.   Bingo was a regular on ACL lounge cars but I never ran into it on the Seaboard.   Anyone else remember the ACL bingo lounge car games?

 

Zo, let us have the next question, please!

  • Member since
    July 2009
  • 574 posts
Posted by FlyingCrow on Wednesday, April 6, 2011 7:39 PM

Congrats to ZO....all of us over at the ACL & SAL HS are feeling a bit dumb not catching the intent of the question.     Ick!

Interesting factoid.....despite the fact that steam had been long long gone from the property, the SAL STILL advertised its trains as "diesel powered" in 1964.

 

AB Dean Jacksonville,FL
  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Wednesday, April 6, 2011 6:36 PM

ZephyrOverland

 Deggesty:

In the Winter 1950 Season, what was distinctive about the Florida Special, the Vacationer, and the West Coast Champion?

 

The Florida Special was the only New York-Miami lightweight all-Pullman train.

The Vacationer was the only coach and Pullman New York-Miami train.

The East Coast Champion was the only all-Coach New York-Miami train.

The West Coast Champion was the only train running exclusively between New York and the West Coast of Florida.

I going to guess the one thing that tied all three trains is that they all ran on the only double-tracked line to Florida.

The SAL at this time was running the Silver Meteor and Silver Star to both coasts of Florida and the Orange Blossom Special was still a heavyweight all-Pullman train.

ZO, you are closer than anyone else. As I noted in my last post, it was an error on my part to write Vacationer when I should have written East Coast Champion.Embarrassed The advertised distinction that tied all three together was that they were the only lightweight streamlined trains that were otherwise distinguished.  In the same season, the ACL operated the Miamian, which was an all-Pullman train--with heavyweight sleepers. One page of the ACL representation does mention "the only double track route" (which was single track between Jesup and Folkston, on both the original line and the JSL).

As you noted, the Florida "Silver Fleet" served both coasts--and each train had a mixture of heavyweight and lightweight sleepers. 

As to airconditioning, by this time the regularly assigned equipment almost all mainline passenger trains was air conditioned, and some railroads (such as SAL) did not bother to mention it.

If I have another opportunity to pose a question, I hope that a "senior moment" does not occur between my reading and my writing. 

Johnny

  • Member since
    November 2005
  • From: Hope, AR
  • 2,061 posts
Posted by narig01 on Wednesday, April 6, 2011 2:41 PM

WAG: Air Conditioning?

Of course it could be a fruit drink and or fruit.

Thx IGN

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: FEC MP334
  • 961 posts
Posted by ZephyrOverland on Tuesday, April 5, 2011 9:47 PM

Deggesty

In the Winter 1950 Season, what was distinctive about the Florida Special, the Vacationer, and the West Coast Champion?

The Florida Special was the only New York-Miami lightweight all-Pullman train.

The Vacationer was the only coach and Pullman New York-Miami train.

The East Coast Champion was the only all-Coach New York-Miami train.

The West Coast Champion was the only train running exclusively between New York and the West Coast of Florida.

I going to guess the one thing that tied all three trains is that they all ran on the only double-tracked line to Florida.

The SAL at this time was running the Silver Meteor and Silver Star to both coasts of Florida and the Orange Blossom Special was still a heavyweight all-Pullman train.

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Tuesday, April 5, 2011 9:33 PM

FlyingCrow

 

 

 

Ah, but one of them had no Pullmans.

 

Actually, the three shared one distinctive characteristic, and each train also was unique.

Actually all 3 did have sleepers, I have 1950 tt right in front of me (well, a scan provided by Larry Goolsby)  BUT I was wrong about their being all lightweights.     Goolsby (who wrote the BOOK) and I are totally be-funkled about this and cannot imagine what the answer could be.   We don't seem to have it.

Bob, I do not know why, when I named the three trains, I named the  Vacationer when the ACL proclaimed that the East Coast Champion, as well as the Florida Special and the West Coast Champion, was distinctive.. I am sorry to have led anyone astray. As you say, the Vacationer had sleepers--and they, with one possible exception, were not lightweights.

Johnny

  • Member since
    July 2009
  • 574 posts
Posted by FlyingCrow on Tuesday, April 5, 2011 8:09 PM

 

 

 

Ah, but one of them had no Pullmans.

 

Actually, the three shared one distinctive characteristic, and each train also was unique.

[/quote]

Actually all 3 did have sleepers, I have 1950 tt right in front of me (well, a scan provided by Larry Goolsby)  BUT I was wrong about their being all lightweights.     Goolsby (who wrote the BOOK) and I are totally be-funkled about this and cannot imagine what the answer could be.   We don't seem to have it.

 

AB Dean Jacksonville,FL
  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: Chicago, Ill.
  • 2,843 posts
Posted by al-in-chgo on Tuesday, April 5, 2011 7:57 PM

 

Well, an all-ACL routing from Richmond south to Jacksonville FL (if not further) would have involved fewer miles (and quite possibly better track, or at least more double-track) than SAL, which swung way to the west in the Carolinas.  Not only were there fewer track miles but average speed might well have been superior, or at worst no less.  Therefore,  those hours saved could show up in publicity or advertising copy as "only ___ hours Penn Station to Miami" (for example).  Speed  --  quickest connections to FL.  

More of a WAG:  These trains had different destinations, and it is correct RR nomenclature to refer to them as "three trains," but for economy of operation at some point did they run combined?  (I.e., nos whatever, whatever and whatever were in the same string of cars, same HEP, joined together, like El Capitan/Super Chief were in ATSF's pre-Amtrak years (summer excepted). After all, the ACL main, along with being an efficient route NE to FL, went through no big cities enroute -- closest match I can think of is Savannah GA or maybe Charleston SC -- but both of those would have been served in the wee small hours, especially SB, and there would have been little if any practical drawbacks, as any entraining passengers could be put on one coach near one sleeper, obviating any particular need for multi-stops at one platform. 

Now here's another WAG that might well invalidate the first:  Is it possible that the ACL's rolling stock for these three trains was "postwar" enough that all 3 trains had rounded rear-end obs. cars (like SAL's Silver Star) (pre-US entry into World War Two IIRC; or CP's The Canadian (1955).)  Though a headache in terms of observations of operations were kind of a headache but did make for prettier trains, as witness The Canadian (CP) which didn't go into service until 1955, but of course American prototypes existed pre-US entry into World War Two.  I think SAL's Silver Meteor was in that class. 

Sorry for the habitual verbosity, Johnny -- but if I didnt strike water maybe I helped move the topic forward a little.  - al smalling -- aka 'al-in-chgo'  .

al-in-chgo
  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Tuesday, April 5, 2011 6:42 PM

al-in-chgo

Unlike the SAL thru trains and most other ACL NE-FL trains, these were defined as separate trainsets (despite having conventional equipment) and did not lease rolling stock from other carriers like UP during the 'rush' winter season (which was off season for some of the western lines); nor did it routinely lend to, or borrow from, rolling stock from other varnish within the ACL network.

That makes them all of a kind, but different from other ACL trains as well as SAL's "friendly competition." 

I am not sure just what you mean by "conventional equipment."

As I look at the listing of the cars bought by ACL, FEC, RF&P and PRR in late 1949-early 1950 and the the listing of the cars bought earlier, it is possible that each train had specific cars assigned to it (this is certainly true for one of the Pullman floor plans operated on the Florida Special). This should give at least a hint as to the common distinction of the three trains.

That season, the Orange Blossom Special was all heavyweight except for two Pullman lines, and the sleepers carried on both the Silver Meteor and the Silver Star were also a mixture.

How did these trains differ from the Seaboard New York-Florida trains? This is what the Coast Line was emphasizing in its representation in the Guide.

Johnny

  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: Chicago, Ill.
  • 2,843 posts
Posted by al-in-chgo on Tuesday, April 5, 2011 3:35 PM

Unlike the SAL thru trains and most other ACL NE-FL trains, these were defined as separate trainsets (despite having conventional equipment) and did not lease rolling stock from other carriers like UP during the 'rush' winter season (which was off season for some of the western lines); nor did it routinely lend to, or borrow from, rolling stock from other varnish within the ACL network.

That makes them all of a kind, but different from other ACL trains as well as SAL's "friendly competition." 

al-in-chgo
  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Tuesday, April 5, 2011 3:21 PM

al-in-chgo

 

Similiarity:  They all needed trackage rights on some other RR (SAL, FEC) to get where they were going.

Distinction:  They all had different destination cities.

 

 

No, Al, trackage rights did not enter into it; the ACL owned the tracks used between Richmond and Jacksonville (though ACL did operate over RF&P between Broad Street in Richmond and AY--but all of the ACL trains into Richmond did this), and, south of Jacksonville, the FEC operated the two trains that went to Miami.

The distinctions were between these three and all other ACL trains into Florida, as well as between them and the SAL trains.

Johnny

  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: Chicago, Ill.
  • 2,843 posts
Posted by al-in-chgo on Tuesday, April 5, 2011 2:59 PM

 

Similiarity:  They all needed trackage rights on some other RR (SAL, FEC) to get where they were going.

Distinction:  They all had different destination cities.

 

 

al-in-chgo
  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Tuesday, April 5, 2011 11:06 AM

daveklepper

ACL hosting bingo game in the lounge car with prize for the winner.

No, Dave, that was not mentioned in the February, 1950, Guide, so I don't think that was it. Also, as I said previously, each train was distinctive in itself, as well as sharing a common distinction.

Hint: consider what area each train served.

Johnny

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Tuesday, April 5, 2011 11:05 AM

daveklepper

ACL hosting bingo game in the lounge car with prize for the winner.

No, Dave, that was not mentioned in the February, 1950, Guide, so I don't think that was it. Also, as I said previously, each train was distinctive in itself, as well as sharing a common distinction.

Hint: consider what area each train served.

Johnny

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Tuesday, April 5, 2011 7:47 AM

ACL hosting bingo game in the lounge car with prize for the winner.

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Sunday, April 3, 2011 9:38 PM

FlyingCrow

First time they were equipped with all lightweight Pullmans.

 

 

Ah, but one of them had no Pullmans.

Actually, the three shared one distinctive characteristic, and each train also was unique.

Johnny

  • Member since
    July 2009
  • 574 posts
Posted by FlyingCrow on Sunday, April 3, 2011 7:32 PM

First time they were equipped with all lightweight Pullmans.

 

 

AB Dean Jacksonville,FL
  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Sunday, April 3, 2011 5:45 PM

In the Winter 1950 Season, what was distinctive about the Florida Special, the Vacationer, and the West Coast Champion?

Johnny

  • Member since
    November 2005
  • 4,190 posts
Posted by wanswheel on Saturday, April 2, 2011 8:45 PM

Pan American by Hank Williams, audio

http://www.jazz-on-line.com/a/rama/MGM48S22.ram

 

  • Member since
    June 2009
  • From: Along the Big 4 in the Midwest
  • 536 posts
Posted by K4sPRR on Saturday, April 2, 2011 8:20 PM

Congratulations, you are correct...and quick with the response!  The midnight passing that Hank refered to in the lyric was when it bopped through his hometown of Georgiana Alabama.

Next one is yours.

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