Trains.com

EMD FT's

24291 views
71 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Thursday, October 16, 2014 9:59 PM

GDRMCo
Anyone have a photo of the ATSF coupler solution?

 

No, I don't, but Larry Brasher said this:

 

"In 1940, EMC agreed to eliminate the drawbar connection on Santa Fe FTs. The change was implemented while FT 100 was in production, and EMC subsequently offered this option to other customers. The substitution of couplers for drawbars involved a considerable design change; the later application of the “Santa Fe” type coupler and centering device pocket to Southern Railway Dieselelectric units is shown on page 428 of the 19501952 edition of the Locomotive Cyclopedia."

 

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Thursday, October 16, 2014 9:23 PM

 

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    June 2003
  • 1,009 posts
Posted by GDRMCo on Thursday, October 16, 2014 9:00 PM
Anyone have a photo of the ATSF coupler solution?

ML

  • Member since
    May 2013
  • 3,231 posts
Posted by NorthWest on Thursday, October 16, 2014 8:31 PM

Dave, yes, you are correct. A standard B would fit a steam generator, a short one wouldn't. This wasn't the reason for the length difference. The demonstrator was designed to have rooom for one, so EMD planned for it from the beginning, and all were built with steam piping in case of future installation.  Problem was, they had insufficient water capacity.

  • Member since
    June 2011
  • 1,002 posts
Posted by NP Eddie on Thursday, October 16, 2014 8:27 PM

Bruce and all:

How can I purchase a photo copy of the three issue article about FT's?

As information on the NP's FT's---the cab and booster units had solid drawbars, but one end of each booster units had reqular drawbars. Example: 5400A-B and 5400DC.

John Synkowski was an NP-BN roundhouse foreman at Northtown. I would use any excuse to take the mail and meet with him. He said that the solid drawbars could be taken apart, but it was a job.

Ed Burns

P. S. you can contact me off forum at enburns@comcast.net

  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: SE Minnesota
  • 6,847 posts
Posted by jrbernier on Thursday, October 16, 2014 7:20 PM

Dave,

  The FT cab units did not have room for a S/G in the car body.   The booster units did have room.  EMD addressed this issue starting with model F2.

Jim

Modeling BNSF  and Milwaukee Road in SW Wisconsin

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Thursday, October 16, 2014 3:06 PM

DID NOT ALL REGULAR FT LOCOS HAVE SPACE FOR A BOILER AND THE SHORT ONES LACKED THIS SPACE?

  • Member since
    July 2001
  • From: Shelbyville, Kentucky
  • 1,967 posts
Posted by SSW9389 on Thursday, October 16, 2014 3:46 AM

While researching my Cotton Belt FT article I wrote Preston Cook who assured me that all the FTs retrofitted with couplers were done the same way as Santa Fe's with the coupler shank over the rear traction motor. Cotton Belt had six drawbarred FT sets and eight singles. About 40% of all FTs never had drawbars.

 

 

COTTON BELT: Runs like a Blue Streak!
  • Member since
    May 2013
  • 3,231 posts
Posted by NorthWest on Wednesday, October 15, 2014 9:43 PM

MC: Not sure. EMD's solution on the ATSF FTs was not to have any draft gear on one end of the unit! The coupler shank was directly over the rear traction motor. I suspect that a like arrangement was used on the many FT sets sepparated in later years, although I cannot confirm anything; it may have been on a railroad by railroad basis.

  • Member since
    February 2008
  • 602 posts
Posted by Bruce Kelly on Wednesday, October 15, 2014 8:44 PM

No discussion about the FT would be complete without mention of Preston Cook's three-part article in the October, November, and December 1989 issues of Railfan & Railroad, which coincided with the 50th anniversary of the FT's debut and demonstrator tour. The series earned Cook the David P. Morgan Article Award from the Railway & Locomotive Historical Society. A former EMD employee himself, Cook had an enormous body of research material at his fingertips during production of that multi-part story, and it showed throughout the more than 50 pages of story, photos, diagrams, maps, and rosters. Well worth a look-see if you can get your hands on those back issues or already have them in your collection.

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Denver / La Junta
  • 10,820 posts
Posted by mudchicken on Wednesday, October 15, 2014 7:15 PM

Did Southern's twenty some odd FT-B's get retrofitted with draft gear then? There are several of those FT-B's (Virginia & Kentucky have at least one each) out there preserved and not attached to an A unit. (4300 Class)

Mudchicken Nothing is worth taking the risk of losing a life over. Come home tonight in the same condition that you left home this morning in. Safety begins with ME.... cinscocom-west
  • Member since
    May 2013
  • 3,231 posts
Posted by NorthWest on Wednesday, October 15, 2014 5:43 PM

Short B units had permenant drawbars on both ends. There was no need for any coupler or draft gear, which was required on B units at the end of the consist (and was fun for EMD to create on ATSF's FTs). This added the extra length, note the very large space between the rear truck and the end of the locomotive. Also, the length added room for hostler control.

Most were ordered in A-B sets.

  • Member since
    June 2011
  • 1,002 posts
EMD FT's
Posted by NP Eddie on Wednesday, October 15, 2014 11:12 AM

The latest "Trains" has the route of EMD 103.

The notes state that the MSTL purchased non-standard short FTB's. What was the difference between those FTB's and a regular FTB?

Did most road's purchase FT's with standard drawbars? The NP's FTA's and FTB's had semi-permantly drawbars with standard drawbars between the B and C units (that is between the two boosters), as 5400A-B and 5400D-C.

Ed Burns

Happily retired NP-BN-BNSF from Minneapolis, MN

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