Trains.com

Passenger car designs from 1930 to 1950

16136 views
41 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    April 2018
  • 1,618 posts
Posted by Jones1945 on Saturday, September 15, 2018 11:38 AM
M636C
Given the thread topic, most of the discussion so far has concerned the leading car of the pair, Advance, later Bear Flag as the first duplex room car, it has occurred to me that the other car, Progress later California Republic, was the first of the parabolic curved streamlined observations that became so well known on trains across the USA (except of course for the articulated Zephyrs).
If anyone can think of an earlier separate car that had such an observation, I'd like to hear about it. The Milwaukee Hiawathas had observation cars but quite different in design and appearance.
The Broadway, 20th Century, the Lark  and all the other trains that had this style were all later. Even Pullman's own American Milemaster was much later.
Peter
(I adjusted the thread title so that broader content can be discuss in one post.)

I didn’t note that Pullman’s Progress of 1936 was the prototypes of all curved streamlined observations car before, but I believe your information is accurate. Milwaukee’s own shop built some very “Advance” observation cars for their fleet which made Pullman’s Progress aka California Republic looked not that progressive anymore in terms of their appearance. PRR’s Betterment car POC70R had an appearance looked very similar to Pullman’s observation car but it seems to me that PRR’s POC70R had taller windows.
 
1948 publicity photo of a Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad "Skytop" lounge car
Another example was Budd’s Pioneer Zephyr, its observation car had much wider windows which fit the function of an observation car perfectly. By contrast, Pullman’s prewar observation cars had smaller windows and a much conservation (but still good looking) appearance.
Postwar squared-off observation car used by PRR was truly disappointing, compared to those used on Santa Fe and CB&Q.
 
https://brasstrains.sirv.com
  • Member since
    January 2002
  • 4,612 posts
Posted by M636C on Saturday, September 15, 2018 9:11 AM

Jones1945

Yes, they shared the same lot number #6478. They became UP's Bear's Flag and California Republic in June 1937.

 

American-Rails.com

 

Given the thread topic, most of the discussion so far has concerned the leading car of the pair, Advance, later Bear Flag as the first duplex room car, it has occurred to me that the other car, Progress later California Republic, was the first of the parabolic curved streamlined observations that became so well known on trains across the USA (except of course for the articulated Zephyrs).

If anyone can think of an earlier separate car that had such an observation, I'd ike to hear about it. The Milwaukee Hiawathas had observation cars but quite different in design and appearance.

The  Broadway, 20th Century, the Lark  and all the other trains that had this style were all later. Even Pullman's own American Milemaster was much later.

Peter

  • Member since
    April 2018
  • 1,618 posts
Posted by Jones1945 on Thursday, September 13, 2018 1:37 AM

Yes, they shared the same lot number #6478. They became UP's Bear's Flag and California Republic in June 1937.

 

American-Rails.com

  • Member since
    January 2002
  • 4,612 posts
Posted by M636C on Wednesday, September 12, 2018 6:17 PM

I've checked my Pullman List.

Advance and Progress were built in August 1936.

Advance may have been the first new build Duplex car although some standard cars were rebuilt as prototypes. AHM made plastic HO models of that conversion.

Peter

  • Member since
    April 2018
  • 1,618 posts
Posted by Jones1945 on Wednesday, September 12, 2018 11:01 AM

M636C

There was one earlier car on the UP, the articulated pair "Bear Flag" and "California Republic", built as "Advance" and "Progress" as Pullman demonstration cars. These were used on the "Forty Niner" also introduced in 1937. These were light grey with gold and black striping, if yellow is a problem. Since it was articulated and shared one truck, Bear Flag had 14 duplex rooms and two compartments. These cars had only a few berths fewer than open section cars of the same size. But the duplex cars were unpopular since there was a lack of space to stow baggage (which would have been even worse  in the double deck car)......

 

   
Ther 49er consist, Bass Train.com
 
Thank you for the reply, Peter. I really like those 12-wheel streamlined betterment car on the 49er! The livery was not as colorful as the two streamlined steam locomotives, but they really looked elegance and the yellow strip looked sharp and eyes catching above the light grey body. I almost forgot this train since UP’s livery always remind me that fast food shop, I am not familiar with their history, but I really admire their insight of the railroad industry!
 
Articulation on light weight trains was actually a good idea, too bad it was not flexible when adjusting the length of the consist, I know not all the cars on 49er were articulated though. “Bear Flag” and “California Republic” was a pair of special cars on the 49er, I always found articulation on a 6-wheel truck was super cool, no matter the truck is new model or older model. It is surprise for me to know that the duplex room was not popular, beside lack of space to stow baggage, maybe another reason was that the travel time was so much longer than train like the 20th Century, sitting inside a tiny room with a “weird” shape was not really comfortable for a 49-hour journey.
 
Maybe the 49er needed a larger observation space and at least an extra lounge car for passenger to stretch their legs. It was a special train for the opening of Golden Gate Bridge though, the train probably cancelled during the high of Wartime traffic.
 
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/17/fa/a4/17faa469455e4ccd718255e25eb80893.jpg

 

  • Member since
    January 2002
  • 4,612 posts
Posted by M636C on Wednesday, September 12, 2018 7:48 AM

Jones1945
 
M636C

The staggered compartments of the "Brook" cars were much more practical. There were cars to this design on the 1937 Cities of San Francisco and Los Angeles trains, so the staggered design actually preceded the patent made in 1937.

I think the staggered design was popular in Europe where clearances were more critical and I think some cars to this design may still be in service (not that many sleeping cars still run in Europe)

 

 

IMO UP’s the Cities of San Francisco and Los Angeles trains were definitely "Train of Tomorrow" (M10000 series, EMC E2, E3 etc.) From the power they used to haul the consist to the facilities used on the train, they set up a new and high standard of Streamliner. The yellow livery is too shape for my taste though. 

https://www.american-rails.com

 

That train was the City of San Francisco No M10004 but later became the City of Los Angeles No LA-4, in which form it is illustrated. That train was built in 1936 and was the last of the "earthworm" style trains as far as the car design was concerned. As converted for the CoLA the train had polaroid windows in the observation car "Copper King".

The trains with the duplex room cars were the two trains LA1-2-3 and SF1-2-3 built in 1937, the car "Telegraph Hill" on the CoSF and "Portsmouth Square" on the CoLA. These were the last new trains painted Armour Yellow and Leaf Brown (as in the photo) since Harbor Mist Grey replaced brown on the 1941 trains and subsequently. These cars had 12 duplex rooms and 5 standard bedrooms.

There was one earlier car on the UP, the articulated pair "Bear Flag" and "California Republic", built as "Advance" and "Progress" as Pullman demonstration cars. These were used on the "Forty Niner" also introduced in 1937. These were light grey with gold and black striping, if yellow is a problem. Since it was articulated and shared one truck, Bear Flag had 14 duplex rooms and two compartments. These cars had only a few berths fewer than open section cars of the same size. But the duplex cars were unpopular since there was a lack of space to stow baggage (which would have been even worse  in the double deck car).

The two 1937 trains relied on head end power, from two 8-201A engines in a power dormitory car. The earlier Zephyrs did too, from Cummins generator sets in their case. The 1941 trains reverted to steam head and axle generators.

Interestingly, following the derailment of the CoSF in 1939, the train was replaced by a train made up of cars from the "Challenger" and streamlined Pullman cars and the repaired original CoSF cars did not re-enter service until 1941, by which time they too had been converted to steam heat and axle generators (including "Telegraph Hill".)

It wasn't until the 1970s that long distance trains again used HEP.

Peter

  • Member since
    April 2018
  • 1,618 posts
Posted by Jones1945 on Wednesday, September 12, 2018 7:11 AM
This design was by Budd in 1940, the layout and floor plan were very similar to many sleepers or coaches which were used in Mainland China and Russia since early-90s. Note the corridor and roomettes on first and 2nd floor are placed on opposite side (for better balance?), such design didn’t solve many problens including low ceiling height but the overall design was simplified compared to PRR’s one. I can't see any public washing room in the drawing, maybe there was supposed a Budd Bathroom Car?

https://patents.google.com/patent/US2312906A

 

  • Member since
    April 2018
  • 1,618 posts
Posted by Jones1945 on Wednesday, September 12, 2018 2:23 AM

M636C

The staggered compartments of the "Brook" cars were much more practical. There were cars to this design on the 1937 Cities of San Francisco and Los Angeles trains, so the staggered design actually preceded the patent made in 1937.

I think the staggered design was popular in Europe where clearances were more critical and I think some cars to this design may still be in service (not that many sleeping cars still run in Europe)

IMO UP’s the Cities of San Francisco and Los Angeles trains were definitely "Train of Tomorrow" (M10000 series, EMC E2, E3 etc.) From the power they used to haul the consist to the facilities used on the train, they set up a new and high standard of Streamliner. The yellow livery is too shape for my taste though. 

https://www.american-rails.com

  • Member since
    January 2002
  • 4,612 posts
Posted by M636C on Tuesday, September 11, 2018 9:26 PM

As noted, there are problems with low ceiling and probably with noise in the possum belly.  It is hard to understand where all the equipment on the car would go -- HVAC, brake, electrical, etc. -- even with some version of HEP.

Partly this was addressed by shortening the "gondola" of the car at one end. The asymmetry can be seen in the side elevations. The arrangement is basically that used by hundreds of Bombardier commuter cars in Canada and the USA and it can be said to be well accepted in that role. Some equipment can be placed in the higher roof over the single deck sections.

The Canadian cars were based on those built for Sydney, Australia, based in turn on pre-WWII Paris suburban cars.

In Sydney, electric power cars were built. These had a shorter double deck section than the non powered cars to allow items like the brake compressor to sit under the floor. This also gave a longer single deck section at one end where the control switchgear was placed above the passenger seats.

I'm sure that with careful use of the roof space and and extended single deck section  at one end, most equipment would find a home. I doubt that the allowance for ventilation ducting shown would work without high velocities and noise problems.

The staggered compartments of the "Brook" cars were much more practical. There were cars to this design on the 1937 Cities of San Francisco and Los Angeles trains, so the staggered design actually preceded the patent made in 1937.

I think the staggered design was popular in Europe where clearances were more critical and I think some cars to this design may still be in service (not that many sleeping cars still run in Europe).

Peter

 

  • Member since
    April 2018
  • 1,618 posts
Posted by Jones1945 on Tuesday, September 11, 2018 6:58 PM
Overmod
You may already have noted that the technical answer here was the roomette.  As noted, there are problems with low ceiling and probably with noise in the possum belly.  It is hard to understand where all the equipment on the car would go -- HVAC, brake, electrical, etc. -- even with some version of HEP.  Would have been fun to build one a la Pendulum Car and tour it around, but I suspect high-margin sleepers increasingly commanded attention in the postwar period (as commodity overnight rail travel dramatically fell off).
Be interesting to see what, if any, continuity there is between this and the Budd Tubular Train of the mid-50s, which similarly dropped the riders down near rail level.   That had its own separate power car.
Definitely. It seems to me that they wanted to place all the stuffs at the front end, but there were a reasons to place those equipment under the car, like heat dissipation and passenger safety. Before Budd Tubular train, they had a very similar double deck sleeper like this one patented in 1951 but I can’t find that version again. Anyway, Raymond Loewy patented the folloing designs in 1946. The PRR/Pullman Brook-series duplex roomettes sleeper had similar but much crowded design built in 1939 and used on the Broadway Limited though:
 
http://guidetozscale.com/html/passenger_car_design.html
 

https://patents.google.com/patent/US2545523A

https://patents.google.com/patent/US2536194A

At least passenger didn't need to sleep under the toilet of the upper floor and won't hear the toilet flushing at night in these design. But "lower floor" Compartment in the last pic would not be practical since passenger will hit their head accidently all the name. Believe me, when passenger sitting for a while, most of them would forgot how low the ceiling was, sometime it happened on the "window seat" on the plane when taller passenger hit their head when standing up.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Tuesday, September 11, 2018 10:55 AM

Jones1945
It would be a good design for a chair-car, but demand of passenger service was low in the States postwar.

You may already have noted that the technical answer here was the roomette.  As noted, there are problems with low ceiling and probably with noise in the possum belly.  It is hard to understand where all the equipment on the car would go -- HVAC, brake, electrical, etc. -- even with some version of HEP.  Would have been fun to build one a la Pendulum Car and tour it around, but I suspect high-margin sleepers increasingly commanded attention in the postwar period (as commodity overnight rail travel dramatically fell off).

Be interesting to see what, if any, continuity there is between this and the Budd Tubular Train of the mid-50s, which similarly dropped the riders down near rail level.   That had its own separate power car.

  • Member since
    April 2018
  • 1,618 posts
Posted by Jones1945 on Tuesday, September 11, 2018 7:17 AM

Another low profile double-decker chair car designed by Pullman during the war: 

 

  • Member since
    April 2018
  • 1,618 posts
Passenger car designs from 1930 to 1950
Posted by Jones1945 on Monday, September 10, 2018 8:38 AM
  • Inventor: Thomas W Demarest (1868-1955)
  • Original Assignee: Pennsyivania Railroad Company
  • Priority date: 1937-06-04

https://patents.google.com/patent/US2143827A/en?oq=US2%2c143%2c827

 

It was a proposal from PPR (Not Pullman) and got cancelled. Supposed to be built in PRR's own shop, used 2D-P5 truck and Full-Width Diaphragms.

"This invention relates to railway cars and more particularly to railway's sleeping cars.

The trend in sleeping car design is .to provide fully enclosed rooms or compartments `for the passengers instead of .curtained upper and lower berths. A single deck sleeping car .divided into fully enclosed compartments will accommodate fewer passengers than cars .with curtained upper and lower berths, so it has been necessary to establish a higher passenger `fare rate. in order to maintain the pay load value of such a car. An object of the `present invention is .to provide a plural deck sleeping car for accommodating a maximum number of passengers in private wcorn'- partments .whereby .the individual passenger fare rate .can .be reduced to a minimum.

Another object of the invention is to provide a sleeping car within allowable dimensions that will accommodate a maximum .number of passengers. I

Another object of the invention `is to providea plural deck sleeping car wherein a maximum number of passengers may beacoommodated and with adequatestorage space for equipment and accessories......"

 

Clearance didn't allow PRR to build higher cars, the low interior ceiling height of this design would be a problem. The base under the lower floor would be very close to the rail, it will be very dirty and wet on the outside after the passenger (especially those on the 2nd floor)...... IndifferentUmbrella...... The design of Duplex Roomette Sleeper was much better.

It would be a good design for a chair-car, but demand of passenger service was low in the States postwar. 

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