Any truth to the claims on this site that several of Southern Pacific's H-24-66's had originally been earmarked for the Central?
http://www.ssloan.net/trains/sp/3020.html
As a fan of both the New York Central and Fairbanks Morse, this takes me by surprise. Especially for a road that never dabbled in C-C power. That site even has assigned road numbers, yet I've never seen this referenced anywhere else.
I'd love to hear more details if anyone has some. That demonstrators spent time on the NYC in the summer of 1953 is relatively known, but my understanding is that the story ended there.
It wouldn't be without some logic if it's accurate. Right around when these were being built towards the end of 1953 and into 1954 is when the Central started to sour on their C-Liner purchases (By 1955, they were already starting to repower their 5 year old 2,000 and 2,400 hp C-Liners with 16-567's). So getting out of an order makes some sense.
I have to get this out of my system: I find it irritating when a claim like this, about NYC ordering and perhaps testing TrainMasters before 'rejecting' them, is flagged with a link labeled 'source' ... which goes to a boilerplate page discussing general source reliability, and a list of references, but can't be bothered to cite the actual place the issue is referenced! It's not as if citation is rocket surgery!
I'd have to think that if NYC bought 5-axle FMs to get to 2400hp (and thought enough of them to re-engine with EMDs) they would be interested in the Train Master, but might well find that high-speed operation did the track no favors. Certainly they stayed 4-motor high-horsepower adherents 'to the end'...
The CD "Living With Steam"* has a recording of a NYC Trainmaster on one of the tracks. *CD title corrected.
.
I can't find any information about that record -- it's lost in the hash of the Valve gamer platform. Do you have information about it, or where to find a copy?
I have a dumb, but serious question: how do you distinguish a TrainMaster by ear from a CPA24-5? Wheel sound over rail joints or frogs?
It sounds like a railfan rumor since his source defines "reportedly" as " "according to what many people say."
Overmod I can't find any information about that record... I have a dumb, but serious question: how do you distinguish a TrainMaster by ear from a CPA24-5? Wheel sound over rail joints or frogs?
I can't find any information about that record...
Very sorry, my mistake. The CD is "Living With Steam" by John Prophet.
I have no idea what a CPA24-5 is, but, you can tell it is a Trainmaster by reading the liner notes. On other recordings, a Trainmaster sounds like an airplane to me!
BigJimI have no idea what a CPA24-5 is, but, you can tell it is a Trainmaster by reading the liner notes.
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/9e/34/f1/9e34f1d110502887dce73b6fd4a0764d.jpg
Canadian National had some 5 axle B-units, which I believe were the only ones built.
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
Now, in addition to the records, there is a "Living With Steam" podcast, on Apple, anchor.fm, and Spotify, among the options. There is what I presume to be liner note narration that pads out the sounds...
(Incidentally, and in the interest of fair disclosure, there is a 'Living with Steam' Faceplant page. It appears to be 'members-only' access...)
Oh ye of little faith...
Jim, the Central never owned a Train Master. So if it's a recording of a Train Master on the Central rather than a C-Liner with the same engine, it's actually of the Fairbanks Morse owned demonstrators that I mentioned earlier.
TM-1 and TM-2 both spent some time on the road in I believe June of that year on their barnstorming tour of the eastern US (TM-3 and TM-4 covered the west), just a few weeks after leaving Beloit as the first two examples of the model. That ties in with the time period when that recording is said to have been produced.
The question isn't if the Central ever owned a Train Master since we know that they didn't. The question is were they serious enough about ordering some in 1953 that Fairbanks Morse actually was constructing H-24-66's slated for the Central as alleged by that site I stumbled across? Or was it just a railfan fantasy/fabrication like seems likely (I'm not saying that the owner of that site is guilty and out to mislead, but if false, he's at least been misled by a source that he believed to be accurate)?
And if actually true, I was seeking some details since this little bit of the Train Master story is extremely obscure.
BigJimOh ye of little faith...
Which of those tracks contains the TrainMaster sound???
SP never had any C-C units at all?
What about A1A-A1A? Passenger engines maybe?
Fixed it for you.
Lithonia Operator SP NYC never had any C-C units at all? What about A1A-A1A? Passenger engines maybe?
SP NYC never had any C-C units at all?
A quick scan of the NYC diesel roster reveals no C-C power of any kind.
They did have A1A-trucked passenger units from all four diesel builders.
Thanks, Dude!
Some people have mistakenly called the 4-axle H-16-44 a baby Trainmaster. (That unofficial name is usually used for the H-16-66.) If the NYC had some H-16-44s that might be the origin.
To me, the Trainmaster is among the very best-looking diesel road switchers ever.
NYC had 13 H-16-44s, in the 7000 series.
Did anyone actually conflate these (the moral equivalent of an RS-3) with a TrainMaster? That was reserved for the late-carbody H-16-66, which does look very similar.
I remember J. David Ingles making an argument once in the pages of Trains for the very similar looking H-16-66's to be nicknamed as Junior Train Masters, since they were only a few feet shorter and looked so similar (Minus the earliest examples that the C&NW received that still had Loewy styling elements).
He thought the Baby Train Master nickname perhaps was more suitable for the post-Loewy H-16-44's that shared the Train Master's more boxy styling, but with the 4 axle trucks and significantly shorter frame compared to the H-24-66's.
The Train Master story from the April 1987 issue of Trains that was written by Robert Aldag Jr. would appear to cast serious doubt that there's any truth to the Central having officially or unofficially ever ordered Train Masters.
The story tells that the first 10 units sold were to the Lackawanna before a Train Master had even hit the rails. No date was mentioned, but the January 1953 issue of Trains mentions the $2.5 million order for the 10 units and mentions how the first demonstrators weren't expected until April. So we know the order was placed in 1952, possibly in late summer or early fall.
Then the Aldag article starts to tell about the June 1953 Atlantic City railroad convention that Fairbanks Morse attended to try to sell the model to America's railroads. There, they sold the Virginian Railway on the merits of the Train Master and also secured a Southern Pacific order for 16 units (including TM-3 and TM-4, presumably after their demonstrator tour had concluded and following a thorough reconditioning).
The article portrays these as the next orders for the model. Not a word in the story about some quiet NYC order, which would've been news worthy back in 1953 (And perhaps even more news worthy would be the Central getting out of it after the fact).
The author worked at FM starting in 1946 all the way until 1960, rising from sales manager all the way to the leadership spot of FM's railroad division. He'd of obviously been aware of a cancelled NYC order, and I suspect would've mentioned it.
An order 'could' have been formulated within the NYC hierarchy and then cancelled BEFORE being issued to FM. There are numerous internal politics that get played within most all corporations.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
It's possible. Back then, the builders would occasionally construct locomotives with little more than a handshake.
It affected a Central order for RS-11's that ended up going to a different home than what was planned when construction started (I believe one of my NYC books even has pictures of them in lightning stripes at the D&H). The contract hadn't actually ever been signed and the Central decided that the first 9 weren't meeting expectations. So delivery got refused and Alco had to go find a different buyer.
But that the story apparently has never been told, even by a major figure in the history of the locomotive division of Fairbanks Morse, would make it appear extremely unlikely that FM was building H-24-66's intended for the Central and that the deal was serious enough that the road had even assigned numbers to each unit.
Leo_AmesI remember J. David Ingles making an argument once in the pages of Trains for the very similar looking H-16-66's to be nicknamed as Junior Train Masters, since they were only a few feet shorter and looked so similar... He thought the Baby Train Master nickname perhaps was more suitable for the post-Loewy H-16-44's that shared the Train Master's more boxy styling
Leo_AmesJim, the Central never owned a Train Master. So if it's a recording of a Train Master on the Central rather than a C-Liner with the same engine, it's actually of the Fairbanks Morse owned demonstrators that I mentioned earlier.
It quite possibly was a C-Liner then. The Central owned three different models of this type of Fairbanks Morse diesel (35 units in total).
They owned some Erie-builts, but C-Liners outnumbered them by about 3 to 1. And I doubt they were regularly assigning their H-16-44's and H-20-44's to high speed freight service, judging by the pictures of them at work that I've seen.
My understanding was that the Central had problems with the traction generator flashing over during high speed slips. A six-axle TM was probably less likely to slip that a 4 powered axle C-Liner.
cx500 Some people have mistakenly called the 4-axle H-16-44 a baby Trainmaster. (That unofficial name is usually used for the H-16-66.) If the NYC had some H-16-44s that might be the origin.
It never quite caught on like the C-Liner name did for their Consolidated line of streamlined cab units, but some railfans when attention started to be paid to Canadian Pacific's disappearing but long lived Fairbank Morse power, started referring to FM's entire road switcher line as "H-Liners".
Often when it's infrequently seen, it's used in reference to CPR's sizeable H-16-44 fleet, which at 40 units strong was one of the largest fleets of a single FM model on any railroad.
Never heard anything about TM's on the NYC's locomotive plans before. I would mention this, the NYC had agood interchange in West Virginia with the Virginian which was powered with FM hood units. As I understand it power and crews were pooled between NYC at Dickinson Yard WV and VGN at Elmore Yard. The NYC line involved was a water level route in West Virginia but became a hilly line that required helpers once it got into Ohio. Could it be that NYC looked at acquiring some TM's and expanding the power pooling with VGN? Diesels were still new in 50's and I am sure a lot of options were discussed.
I didn't pick up on it at first, but another piece of information that casts doubt on that site's claims are the planned numbers themselves.
Unless the Central was going to be putting 2,400 hp C-C Train Masters into passenger service, the 4000 block was reserved exclusively for passenger diesels.
Of course, that in theory could've been their intentions. The Train Master certainly could do the job and several Train Master owners showed that. But it seems rather unlikely that the Water Level Route's first foray into high horsepower six motor power would've been for passenger use.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.