Yes. J believe the bridge is still in use as a freight raiiroad bridge.
Am I correct that you're looking for a standard/broad gauge bridge or should I look elsewhere?
All cars involved were of Peter-Witt, single-end design, but were of two types.
No change-of-gauge of these cars was necesary, although one of the two systems did have involvement in a change=of=gauge car cnnversion.
Again, the bridge still exists, dual gauge removed, and a Class I sill uses it. In the classic era used by at least one steam railroad, and two interburbans of different gauge. One was involved in returning the cars upon abandonm
You got the first right and corrected my own error in the process. The Scranton streetcar system, the Wilksbarre streetcar system, and the Laural Line interurban were all Standard Gauge. That's my memory when I rode them 1949-1950. While at one time there probably were track connections between them. the L&WV's entrance into Wilksbarre did not involve streetcar line trackage, although it did involve change to overhead wire from the line's far greater use of third rail.
But the second case does involve both an interurban and a streetcar system. And the dual-gauge bridge operation also involved a steam railroad whose successor still uses the bridge, and at one time a second and far-better-known interurban and its predicessors. And a common flower, comes up often in some discussions by railfans of our railroad excursin trips. Closer to Chicago than Willksbarre. A two-man crew was required across the bridge, although operations off the bridge were one-man unless a two-car train was run. But then three men were required, the extra a brakeman or trainman for flagging if an emergency stop was necesary.
Even if an authority like Hilton and Drew were to label Wilksbarre as wide-gauge, I'd still claim it was standard unless company or State of Pennsylvania documents said otherwise.
Again, the bridge still exists, dual gauge removed, and a Class I sill uses it. In the classic era used by at least one steam railroad, and two interburbans of different gauge. One was involved in returning the cars upon abandonment and did not involve changing the gauge of the cars.
I'll take a stab at it...
CA&E leased ten wooden interurbans from the CNS&M in the late 1930s, retaining them during WWII. Although they were set up to train with CA&E's own wooden cars, they had different motors and gearing, so CA&E mostly kept them separate. In 1946 the lease expired and the cars were returned to CNS&M, which ran one CERA excursion with them. CA&E then bought them from CNS&M, probably the last sale of wooden interurbans for further use. Most if not all were retired after the line was cut in Forest Park in 1953.
Movement between CNS&M and CA&E was over the tracks of Chicago Rapid Transit. Movement southbound involved taking a crossover on Wells Street onto the left hand track and then taking the left to right curved connector onto Van Buren at Tower 8. Northbound was easier, since the normally unused straight track on Van Buren at Tower 8 could be used and the loop circled via Van Buren, Wabash and Lake to Tower 18. CA&E steel cars also used this route when trip-leased by CNS&M for extra capacity at Great Lakes during the war.
I think I'm halfway there on the other one. The Laurel Line (Lackawanna & Wyoming Valley) ran until after WWII, sharing some dual gauge track with the Wilkes-Barre streetcar sytem, which was 5' 2 1/2" gauge. I can't find another company they borrowed or loaned cars to so far.
common flower and revenue-use of other's dual-guage track, same one-line system.
Wait, correction, not so short, a substantial amount of track, but the tansfer move one way was slightly different than just the reverse of the move after WWII/
For one of the four systems, a flower!
Hints, one of the two and from transfer moves involved a short section of track of a third company and this involved slightly different routing one way than the other. And one system involved use of dual-guage track!
Doubtful if a crew of the third company in the first case was needed.
To handle wartime (WWII) traffic, one electric system leased surplus equipment from another, and just a bit earlier, but for a difference reason, the same occured elsewhere. After WWII, both leases were terminated, the second sometime after the first. In the first case, after the return to the original system, the cars were never used again in regular service, although L believe a fan-trip may have been operated with them before they were scrapped. In the second case, the cars were of two types but the same body design, and one type did return for service for a short time before the system went bus.
In all four cases, equipment moves were on their own wheels, under their own power.
Name all four systems. One of the systems was reknown for something very very peculiar.
Duplicate
Johnny
After looking at the car diagrams, it would appear that an enclosed section has about as much space (not much) as a roomette on a Superliner.
daveklepper Traditional heavyweight Pullman cars had open sections. At night, the upper and lower berths were separated from the aisle by two heavy curtains, one coming from a pocktet at each end of the berths. The two articulated streamliners had cars of this type. But each also had one car with 11 "closed section" berths. A new development. From what I make out, the curtains were replaced by sliding panels, one forming a sliding door. In any case, this was a step toward the development of the roomette, which first showed up in 1937 test cars on the AT&SF Super Chief and in production lightweight cars for the 20th Century Limited and Broadway in 1938.
Traditional heavyweight Pullman cars had open sections. At night, the upper and lower berths were separated from the aisle by two heavy curtains, one coming from a pocktet at each end of the berths. The two articulated streamliners had cars of this type.
But each also had one car with 11 "closed section" berths. A new development. From what I make out, the curtains were replaced by sliding panels, one forming a sliding door. In any case, this was a step toward the development of the roomette, which first showed up in 1937 test cars on the AT&SF Super Chief and in production lightweight cars for the 20th Century Limited and Broadway in 1938.
The description in Car Names Numbers and Consists is "Enclosed Sections." and the diagrams show an opening on the side at one end of each section. I never saw one, but I imagine that the porters did not really like them because they appear to be really cramped inside. So far as I know, no other roads ever used such.
DeggestyA question: did train and engine crews change at Mexico with the change in roads? (This is NOT a quiz question.)
A question: did train and engine crews change at Mexico with the change in roads? (This is NOT a quiz question.)
I had not studied the Q/Alton route, so I was unaware of those trains through Mexico.
Quiz question: What new sleeping accommodation did the original Cities of San Francisco and LosAngeles have (this was also on several succeeding trains)?
How did I miss that - that wasn't the line I was looking for but it DOES meet the criteria, so I guess you win. The Wabash line from St. Louis to Kansas City passed through Mexico Mo. Most of the time the Wabash supplied the power for the City of St. Louis as well as Wabash's own trains.
What I was looking for was the Burlington. The Ozark State Zephyr and the General Pershing Zephyr, along with some other trains, both plied the CB&Q/Alton route from St. Louis to Kansas City, changing from Burlington to Alton iron westbound in Mexico. Up unitl 1947 the Zephyr sets had "Alton Burlington" in what was otherwise a very recognizable Burlington logo on the front of Zephyr set 9902 (one of the original Twin Zephyrs) and 9908 (built for the run in 1939. After the GM&O merger the logos returned to the normal "Burlington Route" though the GM&O still listed its participation in the Official Guide.
The City of St. Louis, serving St. Louis and Mexico, Missouri, is the only one I can think of that would have had a UP engine on it.
You guys are heavily overthinking this (not that it isn't entertaining)... The same engine crew that left St. Louis arrived in Mexico.
Since it's two railroads and not just one, we have to bring up the Raymond & Whitcomb "Land Cruise Liners" on Katy/Frisco after 1929, and the subsequent "City of Mexico" (that ran until 1940). My reference cannily doesn't say if these things actually crossed the border or just went up to it.
There is also PRR/MoPac/T&P, the Penn-Texas and Texas Eagle/'South Texas Eagle' to San Antonio (or presumably Frisco/Katy special with the red E7s and painted ribbed-side cars to there) with sleeper at one point taken over at San Antonio by the Aztec Eagle/Aguila Azteca. (That was the train which got pushed to the middle of the bridge by a Baldwin; the Mexicans did customs inspection while out on the middle of the bridge; then a steam switcher coupled on and pulled the thing into Nuevo Laredo...)
Since it's two railroads and not just one, we have to bring up the Raymond & Whitcomb "Land Cruise Liners" on Katy/Frisco after 1929, and the subsequent "City of Mexico" (that ran until 1940); I remember the Penn-Texas from another question. My reference cannily doesn't say if these things actually crossed the border or just went up to it.
There is also PRR/MoPac/T&P, the Texas Eagle to San Antonio (or presumably Frisco/Katy special with the red E7s and painted ribbed-side cars to there) with sleeper taken over at San Antonio by the Aztec Eagle/Aguila Azteca. (That was the train which got pushed to the middle of the bridge by a Baldwin; the Mexicans did customs inspection while out on the middle of the bridge; then a steam switcher coupled on and pulled the thing into Nuevo Laredo...)
.
I didn't think this would be this hard... The streamlined train on this route before 1947 carried the names of the two railroads involved in its operation in the herald of one of them on the nose of the specially assigned unit and on some other units used in the service from time to time. After 1947 the "other" railroad's name wasn't used on the streamlined train, though it advertised its portion of the joint operation in its own timetables. The "other" railroad was not part of the operation between St. Louis and Mexico.
Ex-NYC cars like the many that went to NdeM?
So here's the big hint of the day. Something pictured in the "strange things" thread was part of the streamlined train.
daveklepper So, we do define Amtrak as a railroad.
No, he couldn't do that -- he said all ON one railroad. Amtrak didn't own that railroad ... then or now.
He did, however, get the first part of his revenge on me for the Niagara question... if the Amtrak train was just the truncated continuation of the MoPac train under 'other auspices'.
It would have cost coach passengers $2.50 to ride across the bridge... in a roomette $3.00, which sure beats walking and dickering with Customs on foot returning... we had a thread in late 2013 that discussed the sleeper going further into Mexico on FEM, and in 1980 there was an Amtrak publication that had Aztec Eagle service extended to the maquiladora capital Monterrey.
My knowledge of the actual Inter-American is pretty well limited to the 1974 Texas Monthly story
https://www.texasmonthly.com/articles/waiting-for-the-train
which might be the topic of some discussion about how it answers this question as posed.
DeggestyIncidentally, the capital of Mexico is Mexico, D. F.; not Mexico City.
That's nice. But where did the Guide and the MoPac advertisements say the train in his question went?
zugmannPRR to Mexico, PA?
Has to be a streamlined train from St. Louis to qualify. Name one and he may have to give it to you...
WOW!!!!! Congratulations!!!
So, we do define Amtrak as a railroad. No problem. Let us hope it becomes a better one.
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