I recently noticed that one of the rear side frames is slighty out of kilter on one of my locomotives and was wondering how to safely remove it and fix it without screwing it up any further. I tried looking for part diagrams online, but haven't had any luck so far.
Since there were no FP9Bs it stands to reason that there ain't no such animal as an FP9A; if a railroad needed a B-Unit booster they just coupled on a standard B-Unit from an F-Unit. That doesn't answer your inquiry but it might clarify your nomenclature!
From the far, far reaches of the wild, wild west I am: rtpoteet
For Poteet the contrarian I went roster lurking and found an even 90 FP9s were constructed. GMD built 54 units: CN 6500-6542 and CP 1405-1415. EMD built the other 36 FP9s: C&NW 4051A-4054A, NdeM 7010-7034, and Saudi Government Railways 1502-1508.
I found no FP9Bs were ever built, but did find some F9Bs that were set up as passenger units.
Ogdenshops,
As Sadie Hawkins wrote, "they have a great after sales service so give them a shout and see if they have any advice"
Contact Mr. Jerry Harkness, Customer Service Representative at 800-472-2530 or 303-772-1901.
Fax: 303-772-8534 or E-mail: intermountain@intermountain-railway.com
He has helped me much in one occasion and to me it is a good company to deal with.
Keep us posted.
Michel D.
Thanks for the info guys. I did send an email to Intermountain, but I haven't received a reply back yet.
ogdenshopsThanks for the info guys. I did send an email to Intermountain, but I haven't received a reply back yet.
Thanks for the update, I will be interested in what they say as I just purchased a used IM CP FP7 and the rear truck needs to come apart so I can clean some lint off it. And I have no idea how to get it off.
Ogdenshops
You might better wait till next week for an answer to your e-mail since Intermountain employees might have other priorities during the weekend.
Have a good one,
rtpoteet is correct, there was no FP7B or FP9B. They were all A units, so there was no need to differentiate between an A and B.
The extra 4' of the FP was for increased steam generator and water capacity. As the B units did not have cabs, there was already that extra room without the need for lengthening the B units. So there was FP7, FP9, F7B and F9B (as well as F7A and F9A).
That's true, but since in general nomenclature an "A" unit means an E or F unit with a cab and a "B" unit means a "Booster" unit without a cab, calling an FP-9 an FP-9A isn't incorrect.
In any case, if the issue is just about the truck sideframes, they probably are held in by friction and can just removed without needing to do anything other than pull them off. If one got bumped and pulled out a little so it's off kilter, you can just push it back into place more than likely.
SD40-2W Ogdenshops You might better wait till next week for an answer to your e-mail since Intermountain employees might have other priorities during the weekend. Have a good one, Michel D.
I sent the email early Friday afternoon so everybody might have booked off early. I did send another email about a week ago inquiring about a parts diagram, but didn't receive a reply to that one at all. Maybe it was snagged by the spam filter or something like that.
wjstix In any case, if the issue is just about the truck sideframes, they probably are held in by friction and can just removed without needing to do anything other than pull them off. If one got bumped and pulled out a little so it's off kilter, you can just push it back into place more than likely.
I've taken a good look at them and it seems they are held in by more than just friction. Pushing on the side frame hasn't yielded any postive results and it doesn't seem to want to budge at all.
wjstix That's true, but since in general nomenclature an "A" unit means an E or F unit with a cab and a "B" unit means a "Booster" unit without a cab, calling an FP-9 an FP-9A isn't incorrect.
Joseph Strapac's book Southern Pacific Diesel Locomotive Compendium Volume 1 lists the units as FP7A. By the way, there are no dashes in the EMD designation. The FP7A was created to allow room for an adequate steam boiler and related water capacity by lengthening the frame and body. There was no FP7B because the B (cabless) models already had sufficient room for boiler and water. The FP7A can readily be distinguished from the F7A by being longer and always having a boiler stack. F7As might have steam controls for operating F7B boilers (if installed), but boiler-equipped F7As were rare.
Mark
markpierce F7As might have steam controls for operating F7B boilers (if installed), but boiler-equipped F7As were rare. Mark
F7As might have steam controls for operating F7B boilers (if installed), but boiler-equipped F7As were rare.
S Hawkins I have an Intermountain EMD FP9A in VIA Canada livery, and have seen the full size version many times over the years while I was working near the VIA station in Vancouver, BC so POTEET there is an EMD FP9A ! It is the "Passenger" engine with Steam generator aboard for Passenger service and is a couple of feet longer to hold the equipment. To answer the question about the side frames, I would advise e-mailing Intermountain and asking their advice. I have received advice and parts to repair a couple of engines that "crashed" from their service department and they have a great after sales service so give them a shout and see if they have any advice.
I have an Intermountain EMD FP9A in VIA Canada livery, and have seen the full size version many times over the years while I was working near the VIA station in Vancouver, BC so POTEET there is an EMD FP9A ! It is the "Passenger" engine with Steam generator aboard for Passenger service and is a couple of feet longer to hold the equipment. To answer the question about the side frames, I would advise e-mailing Intermountain and asking their advice. I have received advice and parts to repair a couple of engines that "crashed" from their service department and they have a great after sales service so give them a shout and see if they have any advice.
There ain't no such thing as an FP9 A and there ain't no such thing as an FP9 B! VIA can call them meadow muffins if they wish but EMD -- THEY BUILT THE THINGS, REMEMBER? -- CALLED THEM FP9s PERIOD QUOTE AND A REPORT!!!!!
Poteet is correct there is no such thing as an FP9A, the correct EMD and GMD nomenclature is FP9.
Sadie I believe you meant to say a GMD FP9, as all Canadian FP9s were built by GMD.
Poteet your point is well taken, EMD and GMD product data cards can't be wrong. You should have also mentioned GMD in your post as all Canadian FP9s were built in London, Ontario not by EMD LaGrange. Diesel data from A J Kristopans website.
So? It's not a factory term, but one added by the railroad. No FP9As or FP9Bs were ever built by either EMD or GMD. The addition of the "A" or the "B" was done by the railroad.
TA462 http://www.railpictures.net/showphotos.php?locomotive=GMD%20FP9A
http://www.railpictures.net/showphotos.php?locomotive=GMD%20FP9A
Colin ---------- There's just no end to cabooseless trains.
My PhotoBucket album: http://s31.photobucket.com/albums/c390/CN4008/
My RailImages album: http://www.trainboard.com/railimages/showgallery.php/cat/500/ppuser/4049
My web site: http://www.cmgraphics.ca
No FP9As here http://community-1.webtv.net/ajkristopans/FREIGHTCABUNITS/page4.html
None here either http://community-2.webtv.net/ajkristopans/ANDRESGMLOCOMOTIVE/page2.html
Nor are there any here http://community-2.webtv.net/ajkristopans/GENERALMOTORSDIESEL/
Can't find them here http://www.thedieselshop.us/Data%20EMD%20FP9.HTML
We certainly can't trust Wikipedia to get it right can we? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EMD_FP9
Why do all these websites call it an FP9? Because that is what they were built as, FP9A is a railroad term.
OK just so we're all the same page, the earlier poster wasn't saying GMD didn't build and FP9s, he was just saying since no FP9 B units, it was 'wrong' to call the ones that were built FP9As, since they were all A units.
I'm not sure how this thread about adjusting the trucks on an Intermountain engine came to become a long argument of whether an FP9 should be called an FP9 or an FP9A, but....
Actually, I believe, "A" and "B" were GM terms, not railroad applied ones. Yes some railroads bought A-B sets and lettered them like 500A and 500B or some A-B-B-A sets as 500A-B-C-D etc. or had other ways of doing it, but "B" was GM's term for "Booster" meaning an E or F type engine without a cab going back to at least 1939. For example when railroads wanted to be able to run drawbar connected A-B-A sets of FTs (which otherwise could only be run A-B, A-A, or A-B-B-A) they developed the FTSB which stood for FT Short Booster.
Anyway...since no FP9 B-units were built, it might not be necessary to call the ones that were built FP9As, since they were all A units, it's not wrong to call them FP9As since they all were FP9s with cabs. Sometimes adding a little extra information to make clear we're all talking about and visualizing the same thing is OK. I work with taxes, and there are three federal individual income tax forms, the 1040, 1040A and 1040EZ. The 1040 is correctly called the 1040, but when referring to it we often call it the "1040 long form" to make clear we mean that specific form, and not all three "1040" versions.
TA462: Can you refer me to an EMD or GMD product data card with the term FP9A on it?
The use of the term FP9A apparently originated with Canadian National. Then it went to VIA, etc. Did C&NW, NdeM, CP and the Saudi Government Railways use the same term, FP9A? You say all did, but you have not proven that point.
Perhaps I recognize in Poteet one who does not suffer from the revisionist infection. I am not quoting new found knowledge, simply truth.
Ed in Kentucky
TA462 Slowly TA462 bangs his head against the wall. SSW9389 So? It's not a factory term, but one added by the railroad. No FP9As or FP9Bs were ever built by either EMD or GMD. The addition of the "A" or the "B" was done by the railroad. TA462 http://www.railpictures.net/showphotos.php?locomotive=GMD%20FP9A Dude, didn't I already say that? The fact is that CN and VIA and anyone else that owned them called them FP9A's. Period. Why do you think I added my SD45 example in there? Just because EMD, GMD or anyone else for that matter builds a locomotive doesn't mean that the railroads have to call them what they do. Why do you think GP9's are called by so many other names? Railroads modified loco's all the time and when they did they changed what the factory name was. Why do you think they did that? The FP9A existed and if you guys don't want to believe it then who cares. The Rail Pictures website is one of the toughest loco sites when it comes to locomotive accuracy. Surely they can't be wrong too? Why is it so many people have pictures of FP9A's, have actually driven in them and why are railroad museums restoring them if they never existed? They can't all be fools can they? Maybe you and Mr Poteet didn't tell them about your new found knowledge of Canadian locomotives before they spent tens of thousands of dollars restoring them. I'm surprised Rail Pictures never contacted you two for your approval on the examples I posted. Maybe you guys should contact them and the photographers and tell them that they are wrong as well.
Slowly TA462 bangs his head against the wall.
SSW9389 So? It's not a factory term, but one added by the railroad. No FP9As or FP9Bs were ever built by either EMD or GMD. The addition of the "A" or the "B" was done by the railroad. TA462 http://www.railpictures.net/showphotos.php?locomotive=GMD%20FP9A
Dude, didn't I already say that? The fact is that CN and VIA and anyone else that owned them called them FP9A's. Period. Why do you think I added my SD45 example in there? Just because EMD, GMD or anyone else for that matter builds a locomotive doesn't mean that the railroads have to call them what they do. Why do you think GP9's are called by so many other names? Railroads modified loco's all the time and when they did they changed what the factory name was. Why do you think they did that? The FP9A existed and if you guys don't want to believe it then who cares. The Rail Pictures website is one of the toughest loco sites when it comes to locomotive accuracy. Surely they can't be wrong too? Why is it so many people have pictures of FP9A's, have actually driven in them and why are railroad museums restoring them if they never existed? They can't all be fools can they? Maybe you and Mr Poteet didn't tell them about your new found knowledge of Canadian locomotives before they spent tens of thousands of dollars restoring them. I'm surprised Rail Pictures never contacted you two for your approval on the examples I posted. Maybe you guys should contact them and the photographers and tell them that they are wrong as well.
SSW9389TA462: Can you refer me to an EMD or GMD product data card with the term FP9A on it? The use of the term FP9A apparently originated with Canadian National. Then it went to VIA, etc.
The use of the term FP9A apparently originated with Canadian National. Then it went to VIA, etc.
I'm not intending to throw fuel on the fire, but we chose FP9A because CN and VIA called them FP9A and our forthcoming model is of the CN/VIA unit. I will have to see how CP referred to them so that our packaging on the FP9A included with The Canadian reflects CP practices.
CN also referred to the unit as FP-9A, but we've decided to omit the hyphen as it wasn't always used and most modellers don't include a hyphen when referring to different F unit models.
(Actually, the CN and VIA units were usually referred to as "6500s" and "6300s" but that is not specific enough for a model product.)
CN/VIA was the single biggest user of the FP9A and used them longer and put more miles on them than any other railroad. Also, GMD made the FP9As for CN. If CN chose to call it the Tomato, it would be accurate for railfans to refer to the locomotive as the Tomato. For those two reasons, I think it is kosher to use FP9A.
The official builder terminology for the original CN Turbo was TMT-7D and for the VIA Turbo was TMT-9D. I think people can be forgiven for just calling it the Turbo. Many (if not the vast majority) of the people who worked on and even rebuilt the trains have never heard of the TMT-7D or TMT-9D. I know. I've spoken with a whole lot of them.
The original name for CN's 1954-built CC&F coaches was EM Coach, because these cars had Electro-Mechanical air conditioning. I don't even know if this was CC&F's name, as my blueprints are at the office, but it was CN's original name in 1954. This term was used in marshalling lists into the VIA years.
Talk to any VIA employee who worked on those cars and they won't know what "EM Coach" means. They will, however, know what a "blue and yellow" coach is. VIA recognized this and in the 1980s (after all ice-AC cars were retired) started referring to these coaches as "conventional" coaches or "Blue and Yellow" coaches. I have a service manual from 1988 for "Blue and Yellow Cars." It's actually printed on each page. So if I go to a retired VIA employee and ask for his memories about EM coaches, I will be using the correct builder's term. But unfortunately he won't know what I am talking about.
Ontario's "Brewers Retail" outlets renamed themselves "The Beer Store" because everybody called it "The Beer Store."
There are millions of examples out there of popular nomenclature overtaking the original nomenclature. Just go ask any 30-something what "ironic" means. In some cases the popular nomenclature is wrong ("ain't" will likely never be accepted in a postgraduate essay, nor will the Alanis Morissette definition of "ironic") but in most cases the new term is accepted alongside the old one.
I think that the majority agrees that FP9 and FP9A are both acceptable.
Best regards,
Jason
Jason Shron - President - Rapido Trains Inc. - RapidoTrains.comMy HO scale Kingston Sub layout: Facebook.com/KingstonSub
Canadian Pacific used the FP9A designation as well - http://www.mountainrailway.com/CP%204100%20Page%201.htm
http://www.trainweb.org/galt-stn/cproster/locomotive/1400s/1400a.htm
Along with a couple of other North American railroads by the looks of it - http://209.85.120.98/showphotos.php?locomotive=FP9a
Yeah, this thread has turned out to be very educational. I certainly won't argue that point.
Picture of the Mexican FP9A - http://emdexport.railfan.net/namerica/mexico6d.html
And one of the Saudi FP9A - http://emdexport.railfan.net/mideast/saudi4.html
And finally a couple of screencaps from the CN 1974 Databook - http://www.geocities.com/vchrusch/fp9a_1.bmp
http://www.geocities.com/vchrusch/fp9a_2.bmp
Btw, great resource, TA462! Thanks for posting that link to it.
ogdenshops wjstix In any case, if the issue is just about the truck sideframes, they probably are held in by friction and can just removed without needing to do anything other than pull them off. If one got bumped and pulled out a little so it's off kilter, you can just push it back into place more than likely. I've taken a good look at them and it seems they are held in by more than just friction. Pushing on the side frame hasn't yielded any postive results and it doesn't seem to want to budge at all.
If it is not a friction fit, the locating/ mounting lugs of the side frames are most likely secured by the bottom cover. One of the tabs may not be engaged if the sideframe is skewed.
Modeling B&O- Chessie Bob K. www.ssmrc.org
bogp40ogdenshops wjstix In any case, if the issue is just about the truck sideframes, they probably are held in by friction and can just removed without needing to do anything other than pull them off. If one got bumped and pulled out a little so it's off kilter, you can just push it back into place more than likely. I've taken a good look at them and it seems they are held in by more than just friction. Pushing on the side frame hasn't yielded any postive results and it doesn't seem to want to budge at all. If it is not a friction fit, the locating/ mounting lugs of the side frames are most likely secured by the bottom cover. One of the tabs may not be engaged if the sideframe is skewed.
Whew, back on topic, thanks! I also looked at mine and there is bar that runs from side to side both fore and aft on each truck, so they appear to be one piece side frames that need to be snapped off somehow.
TA462,
FP9 or FP9A, I will grant you may be spitting hairs over who called who what. BUT, GM never called them FP9A's only some of their owners did, but I was more alarmed by your B unit names?
As for B units, just because a B unit has passenger steam heat equipment does not turn it into an "FP9B".
The FP designation refers specificly to the longer wheel base A units. No such longer wheelbase B units existed. All B units, with or without steam heat where the same length and are therefore are "F" units not FP units, at least in EMD's books.
AND lots, and lots of regular length F3's, F7's, F9's where built with steam heat equipment. The presence of that equipment did not make a regular length F unit of any kind into an FP, be it an A or B. A steam heat equiped F7 and a FP7 are two COMPLETELY different locomotives, even if they do share a lot of common parts.
The longer wheelbase FP option was not offered until F7's where in production so only FP7's and and FP9's where produced.
AND remember these locos you are refering to are the last of a long line of F units that all used a set of standard parts and designations with ALL the OTHER railroads in North America.
I do seem to recall some of those CN FP9's where built without steam generators and some had them removed latter. Yet they are still FP9's due to their longer wheelbase, not the presence or lack of steam generators.
The practices of every railroad are/where different. The ATSF ordered lots of their F units as ABBA sets with steam generators only in the B units and extra water tanks in that rear space of the A units. What name do you want to give them? EMD and ATSF called them F7A's and F7B's.
I understand that CN and those who followed called them FP9A's, but EMD didn't. I can call my 2008 Ford Tarus a Five Hundred after the car it was based on, but that doesn't make it one nor does it help when I need to buy a part from Ford, or discribe my car to others.
I know lots of this has been covered, but some of these facts where not together where they might make more sense to some readers.
Sheldon
Mr. A. J. Kristopans' website uses primary source documents to create his data on EMD and GMD models and serial numbers etc. That is why I quote him as a source.
I would refer you to The Second Diesel Spotter's Guide pages EMD 99-100, but I have dissed that reference too many times myself. If you care to look Kalmbach has it correctly as FP7 and FP9. Whatever CN/VIA or popular railfan culture has done with the true identity of this type of unit is called historical revisionism. You can read about it on Wiki.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_revisionism_(negationism)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_revisionism
Ed