The last 3 turboliners have deteriorated/scrapped, so i wanted to discuss something
why were none preserved? They could have either electrified the empire corridor, convert them to electric, or use them on high speed non electrified routes like the blue water. But thats not the main question; i mean were museums not up to buy them, or were they just that deteriorated?
One of the only railfans who gives a crap about the MMA, despite not living IN the northeast.
Failures are rarely preserved.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
BaltACD Failures are rarely preserved.
They may be remembered, but run from;
to avoid the same mistakes.
They werent faliures, i guess you could say they were semi-sucsessful, as they were lightweight and fast. They were also very famous in the midwest.
I hope with the new buy off the shelf regulations now, we will see money more wisely spent.
ThamasTehTrain They werent faliures, i guess you could say they were semi-sucsessful, as they were lightweight and fast. They were also very famous in the midwest.
ThamasTehTrainThey were also very famous in the midwest.
Passengers liked the larger windows and the seats and the fact they were new equipment. Did you see what they replaced? Most of the Milwaukee Road Coaches in service beyond Amtrak's formation had customer service issues such as:
1. Linoleum square floors applied to steel, squares would come undone exposing the steel floor below. Loose linoleum squares would be sliding sometimes under the seats.
2. You had to really push on the vestibule doors on the Milwaukee Cars as their auto close mechanisms were really stiff and undermaintained by this point. It was also a latch that had to be turned and then you push the door, if someone was on the other side of the door when you twisted the latch and they had their hand on the latch......it really hurt, if you were not expecting it to turn on you. Turbos I believe were the first to intro the push button doors.
3. Restrooms on the Milwaukee Cars dumped right to the tracks and the locks on the doors would sometimes get stuck and sometimes passengers would get locked into the restroom.
4. Milwaukee cars were dimly lit, on the positive side the climate control was always decent and comfortable. Seats were comfortable as well though they too were getting stiff with age.
5. For some reason the Milwaukee shops liked to frame their passenger car windows interior in birch wood trim and by this time due to bad seals on some of the windows the wood trim was water stained in places along the sill. The shades on the windows did lot always work either and were designed to retract between the window and the wood trim. Busted seals on some of the passenger car windows made them difficult to look out and they had a kind of fog to them.
So what the passengers had to compare against was not much and that boosted their popularity I am sure. The problem with the SNCF Turbos is they were fuel hogs and never got to a speed where the "turbo" could efficiently burn fuel. Rough riding I remember as well compared to a regular railroad coach over switches and cross overs.
samfp1943 BaltACD Failures are rarely preserved. Sort of like unsuccessful marriages. They may be remembered, but run from; to avoid the same mistakes.
Sort of like unsuccessful marriages.
Nobody loved them.
People want to save the things they love, not something they're indifferent to or flat-out despise.
It's for the same reason a lot of first-generation diesels were lost, rail preservationists at the time were interested in saving steam engines, not the detested diesels that killed the steamers.
Just the way it is.
BTW, Milwaukee preferred the linoleum floors in their short distance coaches because they could turn them faster with not much labor. Brush off the seats with a brush, then hose down the floor, once over with a squegee & mop and crank up the heat to evaporate what was left. The seats were on metal frames below the cloth cushions. I don't remember them ever getting wet. I think the constant water over the lineluem squares caused the adhesive to give way though. I don't know what they did in winter, only saw that in the summer.
Preservation is expensive, even if the item is donated free of charge. Rail equipment is big, and so are the associated costs, and a turboliner is longer than most. A museum would have to find space on their property for it, likely build more track, and then there will be restoration costs. Once that is accomplished, maintenance becomes another ongoing money pit, unless the museum has also found the funding for additional buildings to house it.
CMStPnP Passengers liked the larger windows and the seats and the fact they were new equipment. So what the passengers had to compare against was not much and that boosted their popularity I am sure. The problem with the SNCF Turbos is they were fuel hogs and never got to a speed where the "turbo" could efficiently burn fuel. Rough riding I remember as well compared to a regular railroad coach over switches and cross overs.
Passengers liked the larger windows and the seats and the fact they were new equipment.
I remember riding a turbo once RT CUS-MKE. The were pretty nice inside, not like the conventional cars they replaced. Unfortunately, the MILW roadbed was getting rough, as you say, particularly through switches.
But presereving one would have meant an entire train which few had ever ridden, much less liked.
no they werent. The only failure was that lawsuit.
CMStPnP ThamasTehTrain They were also very famous in the midwest. Passengers liked the larger windows and the seats and the fact they were new equipment. Did you see what they replaced? Most of the Milwaukee Road Coaches in service beyond Amtrak's formation had customer service issues such as: 1. Linoleum square floors applied to steel, squares would come undone exposing the steel floor below. Loose linoleum squares would be sliding sometimes under the seats. 2. You had to really push on the vestibule doors on the Milwaukee Cars as their auto close mechanisms were really stiff and undermaintained by this point. It was also a latch that had to be turned and then you push the door, if someone was on the other side of the door when you twisted the latch and they had their hand on the latch......it really hurt, if you were not expecting it to turn on you. Turbos I believe were the first to intro the push button doors. 3. Restrooms on the Milwaukee Cars dumped right to the tracks and the locks on the doors would sometimes get stuck and sometimes passengers would get locked into the restroom. 4. Milwaukee cars were dimly lit, on the positive side the climate control was always decent and comfortable. Seats were comfortable as well though they too were getting stiff with age. 5. For some reason the Milwaukee shops liked to frame their passenger car windows interior in birch wood trim and by this time due to bad seals on some of the windows the wood trim was water stained in places along the sill. The shades on the windows did lot always work either and were designed to retract between the window and the wood trim. Busted seals on some of the passenger car windows made them difficult to look out and they had a kind of fog to them. So what the passengers had to compare against was not much and that boosted their popularity I am sure. The problem with the SNCF Turbos is they were fuel hogs and never got to a speed where the "turbo" could efficiently burn fuel. Rough riding I remember as well compared to a regular railroad coach over switches and cross overs.
ThamasTehTrain They were also very famous in the midwest.
im talking about the rohr turbos, not the french ones
Thamas, everybody has their own opinion but yours seems to be in the minority. There's nothing wrong with that but it could explain why none have been preserved. Think of all the famous and well-liked equipment that was never preserved, starting with the NYC Niagara.
The Rohr ones, those were used in New York, right? if so, I've ridden them many years ago. They were nice but fuel pigs from what I understand. A turbine is only efficient at a high, constant RPM which makes them ideal for airplanes. Trains and cars, not so much (Thinking about the Chrysler turbine car here- AKA the Bronze Blowtorch)
UP's gas turbines also suffered from the same problem. At road speeds on through freights, there were fuel cost savings but those savings vanished at lower or yard speeds. To minimize the issue while in terminals, they were equipped with small diesel gensets wired to two traction motors for moving them in shops and yards.
ThamasTehTrainim talking about the rohr turbos, not the french ones
The Rohr Turboliners (RTL, 7 trainsets, 264 passenger capacity) were very similar to/derived from the ANF-built RTG (6 trainsets, 296 passengers) used in mostly the Midwest. The differences would appear to be minor.
54light15 The Rohr ones, those were used in New York, right? if so, I've ridden them many years ago. They were nice but fuel pigs from what I understand. A turbine is only efficient at a high, constant RPM which makes them ideal for airplanes. Trains and cars, not so much (Thinking about the Chrysler turbine car here- AKA the Bronze Blowtorch)
i recall them going 980 miles without needing to be refueled. Amtrak could have converted them from gas to diesel/electric. And preservation dosent always mean you have to run it, just put a set on display.
I don't know, museums are packed full of one offs and never wases. The Air Force Museum, for instance, has an entire section devoted to the prototypes and experimentals that never made it. One of them, the XB-70, is practicality their crown jewel.
NittanyLion BaltACD Failures are rarely preserved. I don't know, museums are packed full of one offs and never wases. The Air Force Museum, for instance, has an entire section devoted to the prototypes and experimentals that never made it. One of them, the XB-70, is practicality their crown jewel.
There has alway appeared to be a difference in the thinking of rail based museums and air based museums. In general, it is much easier to move airplanes by whatever means than it is to move railroad equipment.
Somewhere in my photo archives I have pictures of the 'Miracle on the Hudson' airframe being moved on a truck through city streets in the New York area after it was fished from the Hudson and being transported to the hanger where the accident investigation would be conducted. I undersand that the remanents of the plane have been transported to Charlotte, NC and placed in a museum there.
Fans of the "A Train" vintage equipment on NYC's subways may have ridden it for the last time. What I suppose is the subway version of PTC has doomed them to static display.
The equipment was brought out fairly regularly and run in regular scheduled service, to the utter surprise of some riders (and the joy of others). Some folks dressed in period costumes to ride.
Unlike PTC, (and other such technologies) where only the lead locomotive has to have the necessary equipment, all of the vintage cars will have to refitted to work with the new system.
Given the financial situation of NYC Transit, that's not going to happen, at least not on NYCT's dime.
This from a volunteer in the Transit Museum.
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.