FT Demonstrators On Passenger Trains?

[RGeorge]

Any data that the EMD FT Demonstrators 103 were used on passenger trains? If so, what Roads and trains? (Not sure they were even steam generator equiped.)

Appreciate the assistance.

[Anonymous]

I seem to recall photos of the 103 on NP's North Coast Limited.

[ndbprr]

In order to be used on passenger trains they would have needed steam boilers for heating and cooling. Find a picture showing they had boiler vents on the roof or steam hoses on the back of the B unit and they probably were tested somewhere.

[wjstix]

I'll second the NP as one RR they tested on passenger trains. I've got the book on FT's at home, maybe that goes into more detail?? Think there are some pics of the FT's on the NP in "The Northern Pacific of McGee and Nixon" book.

[csmith9474]

What was used on the "Train of Tomorrow"?

[passengerfan]

The Train of Tomorrow operated behind a new EMD E7A and when the train finished demonstration tour was sold with the four car train to the UP.

[csmith9474]

I remember that it went to the UP, and now that you mention it I recall that it was headed by an E. Thanks for the intel.

[Anonymous]

There are photos of EMD 103 in the Santa Fe Early Diesel Days book of the units hauling a Santa Fe HWT passenger train. The photo was taken in Topeka, KS. The units were taken off of the train and weighed on the company scales
Ch

[wjstix]

Well I checked my book ("The Revolutionary Diesel: EMC's FT" from Diesel Era), it's not all inclusive but does say FT 103 did pull NP's North Coast Limited, and has a pic of it pulling Santa Fe's California Limited. It lists other roads the FT's ran on but it doesn't specify what service they saw. I have the video on the rebuilding of the FT 103 A/B units for the 50th anniversary in 1989-90 and that has some more detail on FT 103, might have some info there.

I'm sure someone SOMEWHERE has done an in depth article or a chapter in a book detailing what FT 103 did and where it went...if not, good idea for an article!!

BTW you get a coupon for this book if you buy a Stewart FT !!

[wjstix]

Oh p.s. I couldn't find out in the book for sure that it had steam boilers for passenger service but I'd be 99.9% sure it did - otherwise it wouldn't have been pulling passenger trains in January 1940, plus the book notes that many of the first FT orders in 1940 were for models with steam boilers for passenger service.

[rrandb]

Where would they have put the steam generators. All F units built for passenger servive had the FP designation and were built on a longer frame and body to allow room for the steam generator or later headend power. If you saw an FT pulling a passenger train it was as a freight unit. The first spotting feature of a FP is if it is long enough to have a steam vent and a water tank beside the fuel tank.No water no steam period.. [2c]

[Anonymous]

The steam generators on the FTs were located in the "B" units, when so equipped. Kalmbach's Second Diesel Spotter's Guide says of the FTs, "The B unit has considerable space in the overhang area for steam generaator capacity . . . ." (p. EMD-90.)

And many railroads had at least some F units equipped with steam generators, among them NYC, GN, NP, SP&S, RI, DL&W, C&EI and CGW.

[rrandb]

The steam generators did not leave LaGrange in the B unit but were added to the extra space in the units after they left the factory. Any unit designed with a steam generator had a FP7A or FP5B designation. I am using these #'s as an example only..[2c]

[wjstix]

FP models were a separate deal, they were A units that were several feet longer than their F unit counterpart to allow the steam boiler. Steam boilers could go into almost any GM road engine, including GP's (Soo Line) and SD's (Missabe). But many railroads had F units (particularly B units) that had steam boilers and F units with steam lines. Santa Fe for example never had FP's that I know of, but used FT's, F3's, and F7's in passenger service, as did Great Northern and many other railroads. So...all FP-7's were passenger diesels, but not all F-7's were freight diesels.

[Anonymous]

wjstix has it right. A few roads, including NP, RI and CGW had FP7s (all units of this designation were cab-equipped "A" units) and F3As or F7As equipped with steam generators.

There were no FP3s or FP5s, and the only domestic FP9s were the two units CNW had "remanufactured" from FTAs.

[rrandb]

It was not untill the F3's that EMD even offered a steam generator as an option. This was only because there customers were modifying the existing units. If you see an FT with a steam generator EMD did not install it. There could not have been a FT demonstrator with a steam generator. It would have been installed after it was sold.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by rrandb

Where would they have put the steam generators. All F units built for passenger servive had the FP designation and were built on a longer frame and body to allow room for the steam generator or later headend power. If you saw an FT pulling a passenger train it was as a freight unit. The first spotting feature of a FP is if it is long enough to have a steam vent and a water tank beside the fuel tank.No water no steam period.. [2c]

Not one single passenger Santa Fe F3A's or F7A's had the steam generator. All of the B units for passenger service had the steam generator but the A's did not on the Santa Fe. Each railroad would purchase equipment and use it like they wanted. Since most of the Santa Fe passenger sets of F's were ABBA to start with and later ABB sets, the B unit provided the steam.

[Philcal]

Don't know that the FT demos pulled any passenger trains. They may have posed for photos with some passenger equipment. The original FT set wasn't equipped with steam generators (a requirement for passenger service at the time), nor where they geared for passenger service. EMD's purpose in dispatching the FTs on tour was to demonstrate to the railroads that this was the freight locomotive of the future. Later F units, notably F-7s and F-9s did great work in passenger service.

[wjstix]

From "EMC's FT: The Revolutionary Diesel" by Diesel Era:

Pg. 7: States that among FT 103 assignments was "pulling Northern Pacific's North Coast Limited between Livingston and Missoula, Mont."

Top of pg. 7 shows a photo of FT 103 in Nelson, Arizona. The caption states "On the Santa Fe, 103 was assigned to Train 4, the California Limited."

Same page talks about the earliest FT orders from GM. ATSF were the first to order FT's, followed by GN: "Great Northern ordered a pair of A-B sets with the B-units containing steam generators. Many orders specified this option."

Pg. 23: It says Atlantic Coast Lines first FT's came in late 1943. "Although used almost exclusively in freight service, the units came equipped with steam generators in the B units."

Pg. 65: Notes FT 103 was used on Great Northern on the Mesabi Iron Range, then "split into two A-B sets, the units worked passenger and freight trains between Superior and St. Paul, Minn."

Remember, GM had been putting steam boilers in diesels since at least 1934, so it wasn't new technology.

[Anonymous]

Just because a locomotive doesn't have steam generating capacity, that doesn't mean it can't haul a passenger train. It just can't furnish steam for radiators in the cars. If the ambient temperature doesn't call for heat, it's not an issue. (As noted above, January in Montana would suggest the need for steam heat.)

Likewise, lack of high-speed gearing doesn't prevent a loco from pulling a passenger train. It may not be able to achieve track speed for passenger service in high-speed territory, but that also may not be a biggie.

It would have made sense to demonstrate the 103 in passenger service, to show off the versatility of the machine. The subsequent orders for passenger-equipped F units proves this aspect of the demonstration trip was a huge success.

[wjstix]

Keep in mind too that GM didn't think of separate A and B units for the FT's, they were intended to be run only as A-B units connected by drawbars, that could be combined in A-B+B-A sets. There were no doors that could be closed between the A and B units of the first FT's, it was considered one locomotive. Steam boilers were always in the B units.

(BTW many railroads found that three units would often be about the right amt. of power they needed, and so bought separate F2 or F3 A units after WW2 so they could run an FT A-B set with the F2/3 A as an A-B+A set.)

Back in the dark ages when I was taking history in college (it was easier then because there was less history to learn of course), I remember a professor quoting "Accam's Razor", and old idea that basically says the most obvious answer is usually the correct one in regards to history. In this case, I've found that the FT demonstrators did haul passenger trains in the winter of 1939-40 (and in areas where it got cold), that many of the first FT's ordered had steam generators, plus I haven't found any source definetely stating in print that FT 103 did NOT have steam generators. Going by that, until it is proven otherwise, I feel comfortable in stating that the FT demonstrators DID have steam generators installed, and that this was probably done by GM in their factory, just as they were already doing for E units going into passenger service.

[rrandb]

"While the F unit series was originally concieved for freight service, many were used to haul passenger trains. The original FT, as delivered, did not contain a steam generator for train heating, but a large empty space in the rear of the B units were used to add one on several railroads. Learning from this, EMD offered an optinal steam generator on the F3 and later models" I have quoted this from Wikipepia.com the free encyclopedia. (http://wikipedia.org/wiki/EMD_F-unit). If you can qupte more correct sources I will have them change there information. They list 5 or 6 sources..[2c]

[Anonymous]

I've found the photos that tell me the 103 was equipped with steam generators.

There's an article in the April 1975 Model Railroader on the prototype FTs, as well as a modelling article (the cover photo shows Gordon Odegard's Milwaukee Road FT model). The prototype article has a photo credited to R. V. Nixon on p. 49, with the 103 out on the mainline with the North Coast Limited. It's a "down on" shot, clearly showing the boxy air intake vents on both FTB units, of the style used on contemporary E units above their steam generator compartments.

More important is the photo on the opposite page, with good detail of the pilot of the 103A . On the fireman's side of the drawbar are two air lines, one with a smaller diameter hose than the other. The larger of the two lines is the air brake line; the smaller almost without doubt is a communication signal line -- this type of line is only found on locomotives intended for (at least part-time) passenger service. The real give away is the still-larger line found on the engineer's side of the drawbar. It terminates with a Barco steam-line coupling.

The B unit closest to the camera in the last-mentioned photo has one more clue. On the lower portion of the carbody, between the front end and the first engineroom door, there is a shadow which appears to be a small hatch cover, similar to the doors covering boiler water doors on later boiler-equipped F units. And right above that door, on the roof of the unit, is a projecting U-shaped pipe which is in all likelihood a water overfill.

[Philcal]

Man, you do learn something new every day. Thanks for the additional (passenger) info on the FTs. Merry Christmas to all!!

[rrandb]

I have never denied that FT's were used as passenger engines. The encylclopidia states and the questioned asked were the FT103 "demonstrators" used to haul passenger trians? YES, we have good documentation they were. The second question was (to para phrase) were they equipped with steam generators. No and yes. They were later converted to haul passenger equipment. They did not tour as "demonstrators" as a steam generator equipped alternative to EMD's own E units. EMD was basically forced to offer the SG option by the introduction of the F3's. There customers had proven that 4 F-unit's were superior in pulling heavy passenger service over moutainious roads compared to 3 E-unit's. Same houspower, same weight , but more powered axels. They then marketed them aggressivly by the time of the FP7. I wish we had access to EMD production records. There may be some confusion due to the fact that many people continue to refer to FT103 as " the demonstrators" after they were sold due to their historic role. They were in fact 4 engines with the label FT103 (ABBA). If I am spreading bad information I will be glad to stop and say I'm wrong. I will admit I love learning as much about all trasition era locomotives as possible and could read these post all day. Thank you and this is FUN!!! MERRY CHRISTMAS!!! [:D]

[M636C]

I think that even at the time of the FT demonstration, GN had train heating boiler cars, for use with electric locomotives on the electriified section. I thought they used one of these with passenger demonstration - does the photo show a very short "baggage car" at the front of the GN passenger consist?

The FTs had boxy dynamic brake housings over the engines, but the radiators were at each end, like GP7 and GP9 units. Where did you say they had the steam generators?

When Santa Fe actually fitted the FTB units with steam generators, they used the B unit fuel tanks for water and the B-units took fuel from the adjacent A unit. Where did you say the that 103 had its water tanks? It is possible to fit locomotives with through steam lines without them having a steam generator themselves.

M636C

[wjstix]

Well first of all wikipedia.com isn't really an encyclopedia, it's basically a forum where people interested in a subject can submit an article. If you try to look something up there, and there isn't an entry for it, it asks you if you want to write an entry !! As best I can tell, they make little or (more likely) no effort to check the voracity of the articles submitted, so it isn't really of much value to anyone interested in real research.

Not sure what is meant by the comment about 'confusion over the "demonstrators" after they were sold'?? In 1939 EMD produced a four unit set of demonstrators, two A-B sets. One set was 103, the other was 103A. These usually ran together A-B+B-A, but as I mentioned earlier, in some cases the two A-B sets were split and used separately, in both freight and passenger service. (Each A-B set had to stay together, as they had a drawbar and not a coupler between them.) EMD didn't create FOUR A-B-B-A sets all numbered 103. After touring the country in the green and yellow EMD demonstrator paint scheme, these 4 were sold to the Southern and repainted into the Southern's green and white paintscheme (based on it's E units.)

Most importantly, as Fiverings points out, photographs do show 103 very clearly DID tour with steam generators !! I remembered when I read his post that I used a couple of pics from Richard Green's "The Northern Pacific Railway of McGee and Nixon" when I was making a model of one of the A-B 103 sets using undec Stewart HO FT's. Pgs. 221 and 222 both show Ron Nixon photographs of the A-B-B-A set on the NP, 221 on a long freight and 222 on the North Coast Limited - the same pic I suspect that Fiverings found in MR (I could check my old MR's to be sure). Both pics are taken from above and CLEARLY shows what Stewart's instruction sheet lists as part 134 - boiler exhaust stack, and explains that this part is only used for engines equipped with steam generator boilers for passenger service.

Although harder to see it does look to me like in the book "The Revolutionary Diesel EMC's FT" that I referred to earlier, in the pic on top of page 6 (EMD 103 on the CB&Q Dec. 1939) and the top of page 7 (on ATSF's "California Limited" passenger train, Jan. 1940) that the B units do have the same boiler exhaust stack. I hadn't noticed before, but it's quite clear especially on the Burlington shot.

(Now, these units did tour the US from Nov. 1939 to Oct. 1940, so I suppose it is POSSIBLE that the came out of the factory in Nov 1939 without boilers, but had them added a few days to a few weeks later...although in the pic on the bottom of pg. 6, which I suspect was taken at EMC/EMD in LaGrange at the time they rolled out of the plant, does seem to show the same vents.

So...to answer the original question, anyone modelling US railroading from November ( or at least December) 1939 to October 1940 could use a model of FT 103 to haul passenger trains on their layout and rest assured they were doing so 100% correctly and prototypically.

[rrandb]

I humbally stand corrected. I did not intend to imply there were four ABBA set's numdered 103 but four FT units FTA/FTB/FTB/FTA that sharred the number 103. Do your photo's at Lagrange show that steam lines were fitted to the 103's. The steam lines should be obvious at either end. Where did EMD put 103's water tanks? Also and still relevant to this topic why did later FTB's have a larger overhang at one end over there trucks on the A end? Thanks for all the good information. [yeah]

[rrandb]

( The FT103 begins an 83,764 mile tour on November 25 {1939}. During the next 11 months, the "103" pulled freight trains on 20 railroads.) This is quoted from GMEMD's corperate history on there web site at http://www.gmemd.com/en/company/history/1930/index.htm They maybe more credible than wikipedia. If they built it with a steam generaator they may have forgotten??? The FT was EMD's nomenclature for freight. These locomotives were built and marketed to replace steam freight engines. The E series was already replacing steam passenger engines. If you wi***o model the '"demonstraters" as built in the EMD colors with steam generators and still be "protypical" well hey its your railroad. Its all good, [:D] The "confusion" I was referring to is that GM thought of all 4 engines as one unit hence one # .There was no 103A untill after they were sold and seperated from being a 4 unit set.. They were 103abcd for record keeping i.e. maintence purposes. ENJOY

[wjstix]

One thing I meant to add in my earlier post was that I think some of the confusion is because some railroads - perhaps most notably the Santa Fe - did retrofit steam generators in some of their FT's (Santa Fe also repainted them in the warbonnet paintscheme). Perhaps someone reading that has gotten the wrong idea that no FT's came from the factory with steam generators and any that had generators had to have it retrofitted?? This is of course wrong, the second order filled for FT's (after ATSF's initial order) was from Great Northern, who specified inclusion of steam generators.

OK on to the comments added since my last post !! [:)]

GM/EMC didn't think of these as four engines, but as two - as originally designed, all FT's were meant to be operated as an A-B set. They had drawbars between them, not couplers - there weren't even doors for the walkways between the A and B units!!

According to the Diesel Era book on FT's, as built, one A-B set was numbered 1030 and the other 1031, which were their shop serial numbers from the factory. They were shortly changed to 103 and 103A. The numbers were only shown in the numberboxes on the front of the A units. The B units didn't have numbers on them anywhere, unless it was inside the units somewhere. (Later railroads used variations of "A-B" or "A-B-C-D" numbering, GM did not. When the demonstrators went back to EMD and were repainted there and used to fill the Southern's order for FT's, they became Southern 6101A-B-C-D, all connected per RR order with drawbars. ) The pic on the CB&Q in 1939 on page 6 clearly shows "103A" in the numberboard of the lead engine, the pic below it shows the other A unit with "103" in it's numberbox. As I pointed out, the two A-B sets sometimes worked independently, so they needed some way to keep track of which was which. [%-)]

As far as the B unit overhang, I'm afraid you have it backwards. This overhang was designed in the FT B units in 1939, numerous books on the subject site this is as a classic spotting feature of FT B units. If you look at an FT A unit, the rear trucks are much closer to the rear of the locomotive than the front truck is to the nose...perhaps to allow room for the pilot?? The B units were built on basically the same frame as the A units, only turned 180 degrees around, so there was an overhang in the back of the B units. I

In 1941, Great Northern ordered some shorter B units because they wanted to order A-B-A sets of FT's. These shorter B's were called FTSB units and didn't have the overhang. (Diesel Era book, pg. 65.) They were about 5' shorter than standard 48'-1" B units "which eliminated space at the rear available for a 1200-gallon water supply for the steam generator." ("General Motors' F-Units - The Locomotives that Revolutionized Railroading" pg. 23) So the demonstrators had the overhang. BTW the truck spacing was changed on the F2 and all subsequent F units to be symmetrical. That's why this is unique to the FT.

Both pics on page 6 of the Diesel Era book show hoses coming out from the opening for the front coupler on the pilots of the A units. There appear to be two on each side or at least two on one side and one on the other side, hard to tell for sure. I assume these are for air brakes and for steam, but I'm not an expert on hoses/steam lines etc. The pic on pg. 7 shows only two hoses coming from the pilot of an ATSF FT-A unit in warbonnet paint scheme for passenger service, the hoses appear about the same size as the ones on 103 and 103A.

I looked at the EMD site, it's a timeline on the history of EMC/EMD. The entire entry is:

"1939 The FT103 begins an 83,764 mile tour on November 25. During the next 11 months, the "103" pulled freight trains on 20 railroads. It operated in temperatures ranging from 110 degrees in the shade to 40 degrees below zero and under conditions ranging from dense sea-level air to the rarefied atmosphere of Tennessee Pass, 10,200 feet high. "

The fact that they didn't mention that the units had steam generators or pulled passenger trains or were technically numbered 103 and 103A is irrelevant in such a brief entry. If a one-sentence synopsis of Abraham Lincoln's life says he was President and doesn't say he was a Congressman, it doesn't prove he wasn't a Congressman!!

As far as my railroad, my model FT 103 A-B set has the correct external vents etc. for steam generators because the REAL demonstrator sets had it. That is not as far as I can see debateable, there are just too many pictures and text that prove it.

Folks, I love discussing RR topics here but PLEASE take a look at some of the books I've referenced before continuing this thread. [:D]

As far as I can see this case is closed.[?][soapbox]