Om page 197 of Twilight of the Great Trains is a picture of GP9's with steam boilers. The GP9's are separated from the passenger cars with Flexi-Van containers in-between. How did the steam get to the passenger cars, assuming it did?Thanks
Gamer AnonOm page 197 of Twilight of the Great Trains is a picture of GP9's with steam boilers. The GP9's are separated from the passenger cars with Flexi-Van containers in-between. How did the steam get to the passenger cars, assuming it did? Thanks
Thanks
Flexi-van cars used in passenger operations had steam lines for pass through from the engines to the cars that required it. On Mail & Express trains - the Mail and Express cars all also have steam lines to pass steam on to the cars that need it, as evidenced by trains having a number of mail and/or express cars in addition to their 6 to 10 or more occupied passenger cars.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Gamer Anon Om page 197 of Twilight of the Great Trains is a picture of GP9's with steam boilers. The GP9's are separated from the passenger cars with Flexi-Van containers in-between. How did the steam get to the passenger cars, assuming it did?Thanks
Could you have mistyped the page number? My (hardbound) copy only goes to pg. 190.
Maybe there is a later edition with added content?
What is the name of the chapter?
Balt covered the answer; I'm just curious about the photo now.
I know that the IC often used their passenger GP9s on both the Land O' Corn and the Hawkeye back in the day. The Land O' Corn had those flexi-vans on the head end and those cars had steam lines on them.
It wasn't just Flexi-Van cars that had steam lines. Numerous TTX flatcars had steam lines so they could be used in passenger consists. Express boxcars also had such lines, along with passenger trucks.
Photos of Santa Fe mail trains with COFC on TTX cars are common. The Rock Island would regularly add TOFC to passenger consists. I remember the 7:00 AM Peoria Rocket leaving Peoria with a TOFC mail trailer up front after it lost its RPO.
When the railroads first developed intermodal container service, in the 1920's, some container cars were equiped with steam lines to move mail and express on passenger trains. Of course our government shut down the early container service because they didn't understand economic reality.
greyhounds ... Of course our government shut down the early container service because they didn't understand economic reality.
Could you explain what you mean? I am unfamiliar with that part of railroad history.
There were several programs starting in the 120's to use smal containers (somewhere around 500 cu ft) to dramatically lower the cost of LCL shipping. The idea was that the container would be loaded at the shipper's facility, and trucked to the nearest RR freight station to load on the train. A similar process would be doen for the receiving end. In both cases the freighthouse would be bypassed saving a lot of labor costs. The RR's were keen on passing on the cost savings in the form of lowered rates, but the ICC stated that the container service would have to go by the higher rates of standard LCL (ca 1931).
One of the tragic things about this fiasco was that containerized shipping would have been an enormous help durin WW2 as contaners as we know them now got a big boost from logistics for the Vietnam conflict.
Thanks.
Yeah, that does sound like a fiasco.
The IC's 'Can o Corn' also operated behind E units trailing Flexivans.
charlie hebdoThe IC's 'Can o Corn' also operated behind E units trailing Flexivans.
But that configuration explicitly doesn't require steamline connections to or through the van flats...
Overmod charlie hebdo The IC's 'Can o Corn' also operated behind E units trailing Flexivans. But that configuration explicitly doesn't require steamline connections to or through the van flats...
charlie hebdo The IC's 'Can o Corn' also operated behind E units trailing Flexivans.
If the Flexivans in fact trail the motive power and are ahead of the passenger occupied cars that configuration does require steam lines. Were the Flexivans to trail the passenger occupied cars, steam lines would not be required.
BaltACDIf the Flexivans in fact trail the motive power and are ahead of the passenger occupied cars that configuration does require steam lines. Were the Flexivans to trail the passenger occupied cars, steam lines would not be required.
I thought he was referring to something Johnny posted a few years ago showing IC trains trailing Flexivan flats, if I recall correctly in the very last few weeks or days before Amtrak. Looking more carefully, the post could refer to running the van flats behind the power, in which case the 'through' steamlines would indeed have to be used.
Of course it does, Geep or E.
charlie hebdoOf course it does, Geep or E.
As noted, I misunderstood what you meant, thinking of pictures showing the vans trailing whole IC consists. (I think there were some instances of TOFC in the same end location in the train, and I suspect those flats would have had no steam lines, but it would be interesting to check TT history...)
IC's (and other roads) Flexi-Van flats in passenger service were AAR Class BLF, which included steam and signal lines in their equipment.
Overmod BaltACD If the Flexivans in fact trail the motive power and are ahead of the passenger occupied cars that configuration does require steam lines. Were the Flexivans to trail the passenger occupied cars, steam lines would not be required. I thought he was referring to something Johnny posted a few years ago showing IC trains trailing Flexivan flats, if I recall correctly in the very last few weeks or days before Amtrak. Looking more carefully, the post could refer to running the van flats behind the power, in which case the 'through' steamlines would indeed have to be used.
BaltACD If the Flexivans in fact trail the motive power and are ahead of the passenger occupied cars that configuration does require steam lines. Were the Flexivans to trail the passenger occupied cars, steam lines would not be required.
Johnny
DeggestyThanks for the reference, Overmod, but the only picture I remember posting is one in which you see an antediluvian rail fan.
Three or four of them were of trains in or leaving Memphis Central Station. As I recall, there were shots both with Flexis and with trailers (although not together) by the time the discussion turned elsewhere...
I did go through Memphis on #1 in October of 1970, on my way from Carbondale to Carrollton Avenue; I do not recall seeing any kind of intermodal in the train. We left Memphis about nine in the evening (4 hours late), and arrived at Carrollton Avenue in time for me take Southern's #2 to Tuscaloosa (about 7 hours late; my thought was getting back to where I lived in Alabama that day.
In my high school days, I remember watching the "Campus" (Chicago-Carbondale) from the platform at 115th Street. It usually had three or four flats on the rear, probably placed there for ease in cutting them out at intermediate points.
Lithonia Operator greyhounds ... Of course our government shut down the early container service because they didn't understand economic reality. Could you explain what you mean? I am unfamiliar with that part of railroad history.
Well, your unfamiliarity isn't your fault. The unwarranted and misguided government interference in rail-truck integration doesn’t receive anywhere near the emphasis in transportation history that it deserves. Our current system of freight movement was largely shaped by these government decisions. And they were flat out awful.
Sometimes, they do get coverage but from government apologists such as H. Roger Grant and their willing allies in the left wing media. They opine that the government just had to get in there. No, it didn’t. You can see Grant’s perversion of history in the spring 2018 issue of Classic Trains. (Robert S. McGonigal, coconspirator and editor.) Grant actually holds that the government just had to stop people from acquiring their own trucks and earning a living hauling freight. He seems to think it would have been preferable for them to go on welfare. He seems to believe that starting your own business and making your own way are things the government must stop.
The advent of significant motor freight in the 1920’s caused “Creative Destruction” in the US logistics system. Creative destruction is a necessary, inevitable, and often disruptive part of any successful economy. Replacement of old methods by voluntary change (improved efficiency) is overall for the best. Otherwise, it won’t happen.
But some folks are very happy with things just the way they are. And such folks will go running to the government crying “Make Them Stop.” (The advent of supermarkets is an example. People were actually seeking legislation to block A&P stores.) If a government tries to stop change and innovation it will be making a significant error and the population will suffer for that error.
Railroads, lead by the New York Central, responded to the new motor freight competition by introducing quality container services. They did this in the early 1920’s. This is when a commercial truck that could handle a decent (5 tons) load of freight became available. The container system GREATLY reduced the railroads’ cost of moving freight. Most of this cost reduction was passed on to customers. It was, after all, a response to competition. But the railroads hung on to maybe 1/3 of the savings.
So we had better service, lower prices, and improved profits. And the government just had to put an end to that. In 1931 they ordered the railroads to increase their rates on container services to non competitive levels. They did this to protect the existing “Rate Structure”, something that could not possibly be done given the then new motor freight technology and its creative destruction of the old “Rate Structure”. (Think about a government commission actually ordering corporations to increase their prices. In the depression.) This ordered rate increase killed intermodal container transportation.
There were other very significant regulatory blunders which prevented effective rail-truck integration. But I think I’ve made my point. The government should have never assumed the power that it did.
greyhoundsIn 1931 they ordered the railroads to increase their rates on container services to non competitive levels.
One might also wonder if there was a certain amount of lobbying by the truck industry...
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...
Quoting greyhounds " (The advent of supermarkets is an example. People were actually seeking legislation to block A&P stores.) "
I grew up in a small town about ten miles from a much larger town which had an A&P store and later, a Winn-Dixie store. One mercahnt in my home town once said that the supermarkets made money by charging for a broom they kept at the checkout and giving it to the customer or taking it off the bill if the customer noted the attempt. My mother often bought groceries at the A&P if she had a ride to the larger town. (Greyhound charged 25 cents for a one-eay trip, and 40 or 45 cents for a roundtrip.)
tree68 greyhounds In 1931 they ordered the railroads to increase their rates on container services to non competitive levels. One might also wonder if there was a certain amount of lobbying by the truck industry...
greyhounds In 1931 they ordered the railroads to increase their rates on container services to non competitive levels.
Add to that GM and other truck and trailer manufacturers. Money talks.
Don't forget big rubber and big oil. The Firestone's and the Rockefeller's would have real interests.
Don't forget about Judge Doom and his 'dip'!
Seriously though, all the companies mentioned actually were behind National City Lines and its activity of replacing streetcars and interurbans with rubber-tired, fuel-burning buses on paved roads.
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
SD70DudeSeriously though, all the companies mentioned actually were behind National City Lines and its activity of replacing streetcars and interurbans with rubber-tired, fuel-burning buses on paved roads.
When I worked at GM supporting the Senior Executives there for EDS. They all said that was a mass conspiracy theory and GM only settled the lawsuits in order to get them out of the way as they were blocking other deals that made the lawsuit settlement paltry in comparison. It was not an admission of guilt on their part.
They stated GM bought the lines long after they were so far run down that scrapping them was cheaper than rebuilding them and had GM not intervened they would have been scrapped anyways with no replacement. The GM plan did save some jobs that would have been lost entirely if it did not intervene.
In the case of Milwaukee Electric lines. The line signalling and other safety measures were years past their serviceable life and the Feds were after the company to upgrade or shut down. A private individual took over the core of the remaining system and renamed it Speed Rail. Even so and after a disasterous crash near Miller Park stadium in which people died. He admitted he could not attract enough ridership to make the necessary modifications the Feds wanted and had to abandon the line. Part of the reason for the crash was blamed on the very old signalling system and it is ironic that the crash involved a "railfan" special during a "railfan" convention.
I think the other part of the blame was the owner was inexperienced in line operations as he was wanted to be at the throttle of the railfan special to narrate parts of the line. He escaped injury in the crash I believe but I don't remember the whole story. Those that died ironically were "railfans" that wanted to see the line live on but only hastened it's closure via the accident and some of their deaths.
The part of the Milwaukee Electric Lines that my father told me about was the massive trestle the firm constructed over the Milwaukee Road tracks as they curved out of the Menominee Valley (West of Muskego Yard) and headed for Wauwatosa, WI. He stated the trolley used to go across that bridge and you could feel the bridge shake on board the trolley car. They still have bridges at that point for the roads but the steel trestle is long gone. Picture is below of the former Trestle called the Wells Street Bridge.....check it out!!!
https://bridgehunter.com/wi/milwaukee/bh64314/
CMStPnPThe part of the Milwaukee Electric Lines that my father told me about was the massive trestle the firm constructed over the Milwaukee Road tracks as they curved out of the Menominee Valley (West of Muskego Yard) and headed for Wauwatosa, WI. He stated the trolley used to go across that bridge and you could feel the bridge shake on board the trolley car. They still have bridges at that point for the roads but the steel trestle is long gone. Picture is below of the former Trestle called the Wells Street Bridge.....check it out!!! https://bridgehunter.com/wi/milwaukee/bh64314/
If you are stopped on a bridge - any significant bridge - you can feel it shake under the movement of other traffic.
As to the Milwaukee Electric resusication attempt, was that Jay Maeder? My memory is a little rusty on that. As I recal,l the man behind the attempt was was at the controls when the crash came.
Why would the GM execs be credible sources? GM was also convicted of criminal charges, but was fined, at least in one case, only $1.00.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.