Trains.com

Classic Train Questions Part Deux (50 Years or Older)

845711 views
8107 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 19,937 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Sunday, February 18, 2024 2:14 AM

Stilll waitng on CSS.

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 19,937 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Wednesday, February 7, 2024 7:43 AM

How about it, CSS?

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 19,937 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Friday, February 2, 2024 2:45 AM

Looking forward to CSS's question.   Thanks

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 4,940 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Thursday, February 1, 2024 10:17 AM

CSSHEGEWISCH

Would that be the Chicago River & Indiana?

 

Or the Chicago Junction.  Long after the NYC system got ownership of the CR&I it was still referred to as the "CJ" by both working railroaders and railfans.

The remains of the CJ are largely unused.  Metra recently filed an adverse abandonment petition for the track along 43rd st. that crosses the ex-Rock Island.

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,426 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Thursday, February 1, 2024 10:10 AM

Would that be the Chicago River & Indiana?

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 4,940 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Thursday, February 1, 2024 7:57 AM

Almost - looking for USY&T's railroad names... Ownership of the railroad survived into the Penn Central era.

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 19,937 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Thursday, February 1, 2024 7:33 AM

Union Stack Yards  and  Transit Company.    New York Central System

OR

Michigan Central,   New York Central System

Depends on how far back do you wish to go?

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 4,940 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Wednesday, January 31, 2024 1:46 PM

Chicago's Union Stock Yards were at one time owned by this small railroad, which later became a subsidiary of a large class I system after a bunch of reorganizations. The corporate history is complicated enough that I'll take either one of the names by which the line was generally known.

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 19,937 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Wednesday, January 31, 2024 9:07 AM

Waiting for RC's question

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 19,937 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Monday, January 29, 2024 3:03 AM

The South Shore did not employ any third -rail pickup and used pantographs and not trolley-poleds, was a 1500 volt, not 600-volt, electrification, interchanged with the North Americasn freight network, but not with connecting interurnban lines, except on rare occasions, like the delivery of the Pullman-built High-Speeds to the Indiana RR.

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 19,937 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Sunday, January 28, 2024 2:40 PM

I read too hastely and missed the South Shore, which lacks many of the features I mentioned.

Happy to have RC the cwinner.

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,426 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Sunday, January 28, 2024 10:08 AM

I'll give it to rcdrye since he covered the Chicago entrance, which is what I was looking for.  However, he missed South Shore's trackage rights into Chicago over the Illinois Central.

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 19,937 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Sunday, January 28, 2024 5:28 AM

RC has covered most, but additions are:

All passenger trains  MU-self -powered, with low-voltage MU control, not locomotive-hauled.

Use of both mortor and trailer cars.

Third-rail and trolley-pole-trolley-wire uperstion, even if most of the  CA&E was third rail and the NS trolley-wire except operation on CRT-CTA.

Use of at least two people (engineer and conductor) on all interurban trains, possibly exception for local streetcar operations.

600 Volt DC power,

All cars used series to parallel transition in accelerating.

Electric heating

Mileage-based ticketing on interurban runs.

Multi-ride commuter discount ticketing.

Railroad-based, not transit-based, signalling on their own property.

Interchange freight with both the national railroad network and with connecting interurban lines.

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 4,940 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Saturday, January 27, 2024 8:49 PM

They both operated over Elevated Railways, the CNS&M over the Northwestern Elevated, and the AE&C/CA&E over the Metropolitan West Side Elevated.  In both cases Rapid Transit service was extended over the interurbans' lines, by NWE successor Chicago Rapid Transit to Niles Center (Skokie), and by MWE initially to Forest Park and later (by CRT) to Bellwood for service to Westchester.

The CNS&M entrance was made entirely under Insull ownership, except for the CM&StP's underlying ownership of the tracks between Wilson Ave and Wilmette.  The AE&C made its arrangements with the MWSE prior to common ownership.

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,426 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Saturday, January 27, 2024 10:07 AM

Time for a clue, the characteristic deals with their entrance into downtown Chicago.

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,426 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Thursday, January 25, 2024 10:07 AM

What operating characteristic, other than ownership and electric operation, did Chicago Aurora & Elgin, North Shore Line and South Shore Line have in common?

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 19,937 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Wednesday, January 24, 2024 12:30 PM

Right.  Next question is yours.

I believe the branch was subsequently abandoned when a mine that was  the reason for the branch's continued extstance played out or was no longer profitable.

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,426 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Wednesday, January 24, 2024 10:14 AM

I'm going to go with the Monarch Branch.  It became isolated with the last abandonments of the Marshall Pass lines and was converted to standard gauge in 1955.  The July 1965 issue of TRAINS (the first issue that I ever bought) had a good article about the branch and the conversion.

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 19,937 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Wednesday, January 24, 2024 6:20 AM

The two renmnants of the vast D&RGW & RGS & CS narrow gauge network are trasdures indeed, the CVumbres v and Toltec and the Durango & Silverton.  The common-carrier abandonment that left in place or allowed restoration was Antonito-Durango-Farmington.

Which D&RGW narrow-gauge operation was the last to cease  before that common-carrier abandonment?  (Hint, not immediately before, but later than one might think.)

History of the route, please.  At least recent history.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,111 posts
Posted by Overmod on Tuesday, January 23, 2024 12:40 PM

No, you got two to my one, and the early version apparently doesn't count.  In any case, your questions are better, and you have a birthday coming up.

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 19,937 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Tuesday, January 23, 2024 11:42 AM

Overmod, would you like to ask the next question here?

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,426 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Tuesday, January 23, 2024 10:19 AM

daveklepper got two of them (PA and FA), and Overmod got the third with the World Locomotive,  rcrdye was correct in that the FA and FPA had identical carbodies.  I'll let daveklepper and Overmod decide who goes next.

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,111 posts
Posted by Overmod on Monday, January 22, 2024 4:34 PM

One of them is that DL500 'world locomotive' (the Australian making the ultimate 'flat front' by putting a cab in the other end).

I think this is the same nose design that the C636P would have had.

The other would be the DL 204 'super 1500' design that closely followed the Black Marias, the ones that went to GM&O.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,111 posts
Posted by Overmod on Monday, January 22, 2024 4:26 PM

.

It's duplicating posts and lagging with typing again...

 

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 19,937 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Monday, January 22, 2024 11:34 AM

Is my the one liooked for, and should I ask the  next question?

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 4,940 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Sunday, January 21, 2024 3:50 PM

The only FPA versions (FPA2, MLW FPA4) were the same length as FA1s but had space behind the radiators, as did non-boiler-equipped FA2s. 

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 19,937 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Sunday, January 21, 2024 11:05 AM

If my memory is correct:

The PAs, for passenger service, six-wheel trucksm center axles not powered.   Boiler-equipped

the FAs, for freight service,  four-wheel trucks.

the FPAs, dual service, similar to FAs, but boikler-equipped and possibly slightly longer carbody.

 

Is this what you meant?

 

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,426 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Sunday, January 21, 2024 10:01 AM

This should intrigue Alco fans.  Name the three general versions (not individual model designations) of the Alco flatnose built by Alco and its licensees.  

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 4,940 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Saturday, January 13, 2024 12:43 PM

Yep.  N&W dieselized its own passenger trains with ACL and RF&P E units before its 22 GP9's with steam generators arrived.  Wabash also had some E7s that had been traded in on GP35s, which were delivered after the N&W lease in N&W paint.  Nickel Plate had retired its PAs in favor of boiler-equipped GP9s, RS11s and an RS36.

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