Trains.com

N&W Steam Development

32352 views
220 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    May 2013
  • 291 posts
Posted by friend611 on Monday, August 19, 2013 8:38 PM
An interesting question. What part do you think Pennsylvania played in N&W dieselization?
lois
  • Member since
    August 2010
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 8,955 posts
Posted by Firelock76 on Monday, August 19, 2013 8:51 PM

Hi Lois!

This has been brought up in the past, and with a bit of controversy as well.  OK, at the risk of kicking a hornets nest here goes, the story as I understand it this this...

In the late '50s the PRR had a controlling interest in the N&W (which they foolishly gave up a few years later, but that's another story.)  Anyway, the Pennsy had "parachuted"  in Stuart Saunders to run the 'road.  In the interest of increasing profitability Saunders abandoned the slow dieselization process the N&W had instituted and went for a crash program that sent the N&W into the red for the first time in its history.  As a coal pipeline the N&W couldn't help but make money so the damage wasn't permanent and Saunders came out looking good.  He went on the Pennsy and then Penn Central and we all know how well that turned out!

The men running the N&W before Saunders weren't starry-eyed kids.  They knew dieselization had to come, but the idea was go slow and replace the steamers as they wore out.

So, I guess you could say the PRR was responsible for killing N&W steam, since they sent the "hit man" in who did it.

I think I hear the hornets coming, I better go get the "Raid!"

Wayne

  • Member since
    December 2005
  • From: Cardiff, CA
  • 2,930 posts
Posted by erikem on Monday, August 19, 2013 10:00 PM

I'd wonder if it was the merger with the Virginian, that killed of N&W steam. Companies that are planning to merge will often make changes to bring more commonality between the respective organizations. By 1957, the VGN was pretty much operating on diesel and electric, having pretty much the newest fleet of electric locomotives of any electrified class 1 railroad.

- Erik

  • Member since
    July 2008
  • 755 posts
Posted by Juniatha on Tuesday, August 20, 2013 9:42 AM

Hi Wayne

>> The men running the N&W before Saunders weren't starry-eyed kids.  They knew dieselization had to come, but the idea was go slow and replace the steamers as they wore out. <<

Sounds much like the idea behind my "steam we haven't seen" - wish steam would not have been dumped so 'Obladi-oblada' style.

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xl997h_the-beatles-obladi-oblada_music

, and by the way , that would have allowed a railroad to 'skip' quite a few 'diesel-lemons' , too

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x19bjf_fools-garden-lemon-tree_music?search_algo=2

Regards

= J =

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Tuesday, August 20, 2013 11:00 AM

I have no idea as to the effect of the merger on steam operation, but I do know that the merger brought an end to electric operation on the Virginian since the N&W began directional running according to the ruling grades, which resulted in most of the eastward traffic on one line and most of the westward traffic on the other--running electric engines light in one direction was not practicable when the power was needed to move traffic in that direction on the other line.

Johnny

  • Member since
    July 2008
  • 755 posts
Posted by Juniatha on Tuesday, August 20, 2013 11:25 AM

Hi Deggesty

>> running electric engines light in one direction was not practicable when the power was needed to move traffic in that direction on the other line. <<

.. and so , how was it practicable with diesels to run them light when power was needed to move traffic on the other line ?

Regards

= J =

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Tuesday, August 20, 2013 12:00 PM

Not a problem at all.  The electrics were tied to the catenary and couldn't make a return run on the other line while the diesels could make that return run on the other line with a train.

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    February 2005
  • 2,366 posts
Posted by timz on Tuesday, August 20, 2013 12:36 PM

Firelock76
Saunders abandoned the slow dieselization process the N&W had instituted and went for a crash program that sent the N&W into the red for the first time in its history.

What year did N&W lose money?

  • Member since
    August 2010
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 8,955 posts
Posted by Firelock76 on Tuesday, August 20, 2013 5:11 PM

Hi timz!  I believe the loss year was 1960-1961 or so, concurrent with the crash dieselization.

Hi Juniatha!  You're correct in your supposition that the slow N&W dieselization process enabled them to avoid the mistakes made by other 'roads.  When the crash program came they went straightaway to Geeps.  No Baldwins, ALCOs, Fairbanks-Morses or others.  Any diesels that the N&W had that weren't  EMD Geeps came from their mergers with or aquisitions of other 'roads. 

  • Member since
    February 2005
  • 2,366 posts
Posted by timz on Tuesday, August 20, 2013 8:32 PM

Moody's says N&W "net income" was 44.5 million dollars in 1957 and 43.5 million in 1958. They merged VGN 12/59: 51.6 million in 1959, then 60+ million each year 1960-63. 

  • Member since
    August 2010
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 8,955 posts
Posted by Firelock76 on Tuesday, August 20, 2013 8:37 PM

timz

Moody's says N&W "net income" was 44.5 million dollars in 1957 and 43.5 million in 1958. They merged VGN 12/59: 51.6 million in 1959, then 60+ million each year 1960-63. 

Well. I won't argue the numbers.  All I can say is N&W going "in the red"  is what I've read in histories of the steam to diesel switch era.  If I'm wrong, well, so are my books.  C'est la vie. 

No hard feelings mind you.

  • Member since
    May 2013
  • 291 posts
Posted by friend611 on Tuesday, August 20, 2013 9:39 PM
However, there is the issue of the lease of ACL and RF&P E units to run on passenger trains starting in July1958. In my opinion, the J's should have been left on the passenger trains, as this was the best for them regarding steam heat and their record of on-time performance. It would have been nice if the J's would have been left on the Powhatan Arrow, as that train was just not the same without a J on the point.
lois
  • Member since
    December 2005
  • From: Cardiff, CA
  • 2,930 posts
Posted by erikem on Tuesday, August 20, 2013 11:13 PM

Deggesty

I have no idea as to the effect of the merger on steam operation, but I do know that the merger brought an end to electric operation on the Virginian since the N&W began directional running according to the ruling grades, which resulted in most of the eastward traffic on one line and most of the westward traffic on the other--running electric engines light in one direction was not practicable when the power was needed to move traffic in that direction on the other line.

That's the flip side of my guess wrt N&W steam, the VGN electrics were also non-standard and didn't last much longer than N&W steam.

- Erik

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Wednesday, August 21, 2013 6:56 AM

The problem with VGN's electrics was not that they were non-standard but the fact that they couldn't operate beyond the end of catenary.  When N&W went to directional running after the merger with Virginian, the situation was one of expanding the electrification to the N&W main for efficiency or discontinuing it altogether.

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    June 2009
  • From: Along the Big 4 in the Midwest
  • 536 posts
Posted by K4sPRR on Wednesday, August 21, 2013 8:51 AM

Although not in the quantiy of the GP9, during Saunders tenure with the N&W they also purchased ALCO RS11, 36 and T-6 locomotives.  The total number exceeded 100.

For those of you interested the N&WHS magazine, The Arrow, ran a series of articles on the N&W dieselization years in 2001.  Volume 17-4 and 17-5.

  • Member since
    May 2013
  • 291 posts
Posted by friend611 on Wednesday, August 21, 2013 12:35 PM
Another point of interest: diesels were financed by equipment trusts while the N&W steam engines were basically paid for when they entered service, if not when they came out of the Roanoke Shops. The factor that may have changed this if the steam locomotives had to pay their way, though I am certain that N&W was earning enough in coal revenue to cover the cost of building new locomotives at the shops. The change came when the railway had all this debt tied up in diesels, something it had never had before and as a result, there were problems. When Saunders was in the rush for diesels, all this debt accumulated which affected the railway's profits. Sadly, all of this could have been avoided and N&W had financial problems which it really did not get rid of until the 1970's. And then again, that was a long and complex story.
lois
  • Member since
    July 2008
  • 755 posts
Posted by Juniatha on Wednesday, August 21, 2013 2:00 PM

on : friend611 Wed, Aug 21 2013 6:35 PM:

That was a point my late father had been pointing out as a decisive factor in the transition of motive power .

= J =

  • Member since
    August 2010
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 8,955 posts
Posted by Firelock76 on Wednesday, August 21, 2013 6:28 PM

Listen to Lois, the Friend of 611.   She knows people who were THERE.  I'm sure she's not quite old enough to have first-hand knowledge.

  • Member since
    May 2013
  • 291 posts
Posted by friend611 on Wednesday, August 21, 2013 8:45 PM
And I have done my share of research as well, which as you see, proves to be particularly useful.
lois
  • Member since
    July 2008
  • 755 posts
Posted by Juniatha on Friday, August 23, 2013 9:25 AM

Erikem ,

steam usually lasted longer on railways / railroads committed to electrification than to dieselization , mainly because electrification was a more substantial change demanding a more profound revamping of train service , traction and railway / railroad operation and first costs involved with the transition were higher per mile of mainline - although with the substantial boost of traction power and efficiency of it , this became relative as soon as electric traction was working .

Regards

Juniatha

  • Member since
    May 2013
  • 291 posts
Posted by friend611 on Thursday, August 29, 2013 10:11 PM
I have heard that Saunders wanted to have the N&W fully dieselized by the time the merger was completed with the Virginian, which was in December 1959. However, this was not accomplished, due to the Y6's and S1a's still at work on the Pocahontas Division and that the last J, 611, had just been retired two months earlier. Also, 611 was occasionally brought out to be an auxiliary steam source for Roanoke Shops. So, Saunders' accelerated schedule for dieselization, with its leases and heartless retirement of nearly-new steam engines, did not completely work out. Of course, there were other factors in the matter, which I leave for you to discuss.
lois
  • Member since
    December 2005
  • From: Cardiff, CA
  • 2,930 posts
Posted by erikem on Saturday, August 31, 2013 8:04 PM

friend611
I have heard that Saunders wanted to have the N&W fully dieselized by the time the merger was completed with the Virginian, which was in December 1959.

Lois,

Having been through a few buyouts in the company I work for, I'd wondered if the merger with the VGN was the primary motive for ending steam operation on the N&W. Electric operation on the VGN lasted a little bit longer, but would have likely lasted longer had the merger not taken place.

- Erik

  • Member since
    May 2013
  • 291 posts
Posted by friend611 on Saturday, August 31, 2013 10:29 PM
That was certainly possible.
lois
  • Member since
    June 2009
  • From: Along the Big 4 in the Midwest
  • 536 posts
Posted by K4sPRR on Sunday, September 1, 2013 5:18 PM

friend611
I have heard that Saunders wanted to have the N&W fully dieselized by the time the merger was completed with the Virginian, which was in December 1959. However, this was not accomplished,

Hi Lois,

  Saunders was indeed on a mission at that time, keep in mind his efforts were also stalled by a steep recession in the late 1950's, followed by a nationwide steel strike, both of which stymied rail traffic during the late 50's.  This slow down resulted in the PRR having an excess of newly received GP's, some of which found there way on the N&W as leased units.  When the situation improved, the mission continued.

  Hoping your friend the 611 will soon be back!!! 

  • Member since
    August 2010
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 8,955 posts
Posted by Firelock76 on Sunday, September 1, 2013 7:17 PM

Sounds a bit like after the merger with the new diesels rollin' in the ex-Virginian electrics were, in a sense, "oddballs."   Goes without saying if you're an oddball you don't hang around too long.

It seems to me that as long as they were ditching steam they figured they'd ditch the electrics as well.

  • Member since
    November 2003
  • From: Rhode Island
  • 2,289 posts
Posted by carnej1 on Tuesday, September 3, 2013 11:17 AM

Firelock76

Sounds a bit like after the merger with the new diesels rollin' in the ex-Virginian electrics were, in a sense, "oddballs."   Goes without saying if you're an oddball you don't hang around too long.

It seems to me that as long as they were ditching steam they figured they'd ditch the electrics as well.

Not exactly, the GE E33C's were only a few years old at the time....

 N&W's management just didn't feel that having parallel mainlines with only one direction electrified made good economic sense.

 It probably also helped that they found a ready buyer for the E33's in the New York, New Haven & Hartford..

"I Often Dream of Trains"-From the Album of the Same Name by Robyn Hitchcock

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Tuesday, September 3, 2013 11:57 AM

carnej1

Firelock76

Sounds a bit like after the merger with the new diesels rollin' in the ex-Virginian electrics were, in a sense, "oddballs."   Goes without saying if you're an oddball you don't hang around too long.

It seems to me that as long as they were ditching steam they figured they'd ditch the electrics as well.

Not exactly, the GE E33C's were only a few years old at the time....

 N&W's management just didn't feel that having parallel mainlines with only one direction electrified made good economic sense.

 It probably also helped that they found a ready buyer for the E33's in the New York, New Haven & Hartford..

I have memory of, back at the time that the N&W decided to sell the electric locomotives that this was the only reasonable course of action. As has been pointed out already on this thread it is not economical to run engines light in one direction when power is needed to move revenue traffic in the other direction, especially when the ruling grades dictated (perhaps not the best word) single direction traffic on each line.

I do find it interesting that the ruling grades were not in the same direction on both lines. Of course, the Virginian was laid out several years after the South Side Railway and the Virginia and Tennessee Railway were laid out and built.

Johnny

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 3,264 posts
Posted by CAZEPHYR on Tuesday, September 3, 2013 1:21 PM

 

Steam was exciting to watch but not so great to work on day and night for the railroad shop workers.  I remember hearing that the N&W was not getting any of the GM parts or traffic in any way until they started placing diesel orders.  That may have been a rumor, but it was a common story around the industry.

I was under the impression that the PRR owned about 40% of the N&W in the mid fifties.

I took the two pictures below in August of 1956.  If you look close, you can see the tandem rods were still installed on 611 in August of 56.

CZ

 

  

 

  • Member since
    August 2010
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 8,955 posts
Posted by Firelock76 on Tuesday, September 3, 2013 5:14 PM

Steam not so great to work on for the shop workers?  I don't know man, a job's a job, and at any rate those men took a LOT of pride in their work, and it showed.  

I heard there were also kick-backs and payoffs involved from GM to a lot a railroad officials as an incentive to dieselize, preferable with GM products of course, but those belong in the wild-ass rumor department.  I've never seen any creditable evidence showing that was the case.

I've also heard the "you don't buy our diesels, you won't haul our stuff"  rumor as well.  I doubt the veracity of that one as well.

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 3,264 posts
Posted by CAZEPHYR on Tuesday, September 3, 2013 5:24 PM

Firelock76

Steam not so great to work on for the shop workers?  I don't know man, a job's a job, and at any rate those men took a LOT of pride in their work, and it showed.  

I heard there were also kick-backs and payoffs involved from GM to a lot a railroad officials as an incentive to dieselize, preferable with GM products of course, but those belong in the wild-ass rumor department.  I've never seen any creditable evidence showing that was the case.

I've also heard the "you don't buy our diesels, you won't haul our stuff"  rumor as well.  I doubt the veracity of that one as well.

I certainly agree with the pride the back shop and roundhouse workers had in the steam locomotives. 

 

Cz

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy