Thanks. Great. You did include the B&A-NYC and NYConnecting that many would have left out. And, as usual, I learned something new from your answer. Look forward to your question.
Canadian National Railways (Montreal - East Alburgh VT)
Central Vermont Railway (East Alburgh VT - Windsor VT) White River Jct-Windsor operated by Boston & Maine.
Boston and Maine (White River Jct VT -Springfield MA). Southbound trains operate via CV, northbound via B&M between Brattleboro VT and East Northfield MA.
Boston & Albany (NYC) Springfield Union Station
New Haven (Springfield MA - Bronx NY)
New York Connecting RR (Bronx -Queens via Hell Gate Bridge)
Pennsylvania RR (Queens NY - Ivy City DC)
Washington Terminal Company (DC)
For some periods the train operated Montreal -St Johns QC on CN, connecting with the CV St. Hyacinthe Sub for the remainder of the route.
B&M's portion was made up of a patchwork of owned and leased lines. Between Windsor VT and Bellows Falls VT the line was owned by the Sullivan RR (Except for the ends, the entire railroad was in Sullivan County NH). The portion between Bellows Falls and East Northfield was owned by the Vermont & Massachusetts RR. Both of those companies remained in existence under B&M control until the entire Conn River Line was acquired by Central Vermont on 1987.
The reason is that you are correct. It is East 10o5th Street, and my memory had taken a glitch. Do you have further informatyion on when and who was the customer and what kind of freight?
Name every railroad whose tracks the Montrealer-Washingtonian used. For exanmple, don't leave out Washington Union Terminal.
That's it, as amended.
Freight delivered nominally by the BMT's South Brooklyn Railroad to a costumer wanting delivery (or pick-up) at the Canarsy Station, with rhe road crossing the last on the subway system at East 105th St. Station. Not a usual freight origine or destination, freight at Canarsy may have been a one-time occasion, and the South Brooklyn always used whatever was handy, not just its own equipment. The MUs were probably standard steels, the usual three-car "B" unit, with cabs only at each end, and door-control only in the middle car.
And you did state that an adapter coupler was used, not at all unusual for South Brooklyn.
The answer is far more obvious than anything mentioned so far.
Standard steel MU passenger cars, only equipped to operate on third rail.
CRT would have had coupler problems, as would CA&E.
That rules out the LIRR, which only used locomotives. If a DD1 was not available, an H6 or H9 consxolidation certainly was.
Possibly the CA&E did this on occasion. The Chicago Rapid Transit did have a freightp-line gradep-crossing (ex Milwaukee), but I believe this had overhead wire. The Sacramento Northern also had freight motors, but may have done this on occasion. Ditto the Lackawana and Wyoming Valley (One freight motor). The Wilksbarre and Hazelton?
But with the Laurel line having just one freight motor, logically they could passenger equipment when uit was serviced, But they alsdo use witre on freight sidings.
Is it one of the mentioned operations?
Multiple MU passenger cars, I presumed in a set long enough to span the gap at the grade crossing. At least 2 cars in the picture I saw when I was young.
I am pretty sure there was an adapter coupler to be able to move the freight cars.
The third rail did not, of-course, continie across the road. There were several locations like this on the Chicago Aurora and Elgine, but I do not recall the exact lolcations.
There may also have some on the Sacramento Northern.
And one on the Long Island Railroad on the Long each branch. Saw a DD-1 do the chore.
The electric locomotives on all three railroads were mu-equipped, or did you mean MU passenger cars providing the power?
I'll leave it open a little while longer, but in the meantime:
Where could you find a system switching freight cars across a road grade crossing using third-rail standard MU equipment?
Does anyone still have an interest in this?
I don't think so. What I see is a fairly substantial engine mounted squarely over the driver wheelbase, with the jackshaft far out in front. My guess barring a little better research is that the thing uses some kind of clutch in a mechanical driveline.
I don't see evidence of how that big engine is started. I'd suspect it would be like the very early V-8 GE gas-electric cars, which used something that is its own potential quiz question.
Was it one of the bizarre diesel-pneumatic ones that started on compressed air with steam like cylinders before clutching up the transverse shaft that drove the jackshafts?
The actual jackshaft on this one was ahead of and slightly above the drivers. The engine was higher than that. I subsequently came across a thread on 'some other forum' that actually had a cab-off view of the mechanicals.
This is all well before the United States entry into WWI.
This particular beast has been elusive, to say the least. there are plenty of examples of jackshaft drive for electrics and industrial diesels, including several by Baldwin-affiliated Whitcomb. The only above-the-frame design I've found do far is a New Haven experimental that could be a cousin to the DD1.
The holder of a couple of key patents had his name very prominently painted on the letterboard of the demonstrator engine, even though he appears not to be an officer or owner of the company promoting it. (I'll settle for the name or one of the patent numbers, since you'd need to know about the design to get them...)
Some substantial part of the construction was by the Baldwin Locomotive Works.
Still looking forward.
Not the Thermolokomotive -- the one I'm looking for is even more like the DD1 (or more precisely half of one, like the odd-D): 4-4-0, boxcab, jackshaft ahead of drivers.
The Thermolokomotive actually did run; the problem was its enormous rotating mass and very sharp piston pulses through rods with no cushioning. Early rod electrics had many of the same rod fracturing and general tribology woes...
I'm not sure whether Baldwin contributed to the design, but Sulzer (Switzerland) and Borsig (Germany) colalborated on a direct-drive 1000 HP diesel that was completed in 1913, just in time to go to Germany at the beginning of Word War I. Road tests on SBB showed it capable of about 100KpH if it ran at all. Arranged as a 4-4-4 with a blind center drive between the drive wheels. Not surprisingly, it disappeared during the war. Baldwin magazine did publish an article about the engine in 1926, written by Samuel Vauclin himself.
http://baldwindiesels.railfan.net/magazine-1926/page45.html and
http://baldwindiesels.railfan.net/magazine-1926/page46.html
We had a discussion a few days ago about the development of the PRR DD1's running gear, somewhat unusual for an electric road locomotive. An internal-combustion locomotive using very much the same type of running gear was developed only a couple of years later, with some components of the demonstrator built by Baldwin Locomotive Works. Who can provide the (unsurprising) name of the company, or a picture of the engine?
Look forward to Overmod's question.
The electric zone between the (new 1943) Central Station in Montreal and St. Lambert over the Victoria Bridge was only in use until 1958 but diesels were allowed before 1958. New Haven steam was replaced by diesel power in the late 1940s/early 1950s with some overlap. Central Vermont steam and diesels operated to Montreal, though CN steam sometimes was used north of St Albans. In the 1950s CV often leased CN locomotives and operated them north of White River Jct. Vt. CV replaced steam with RS3s and GP9s in the 1950s. B&Ms units, supplemented by F7A/B sets and occasional RS3s and GP7s, lasted to the end of service.
Except for the short stretch between St. Albans and Cantic QC all of the route is used for passenger service today (The Adirondack is "suspended" north of Cantic). The CN/CV St Hyacinthe sub via Enosburgh Falls (since abandoned) was used until 1946.
Likely one of the implementations of the Montrealer, from Washington on PRR, then New Haven electric to the Springfield line, then north to the electric district for the Mount Royal tunnels.
The opposite number (the reciprocal of the engine changes in the question) would be the Washingtonian. IIRC this southbound train was first run in the 1920s (when PRR was still only electrified to Manhattan Transfer with steam south of there) and was known as 'the Boot' (short for bootlegger) for all the Prohibition-evading alcohol it would carry...
Here's something unique in North American railroading.
For a fairly short period in the years after World War 2, a particular train pair operated between two North American Cities via a larger city, with the following characteristics:
First leg behind an electric locomotive
Second leg behind a different electric locomotive
Third leg behind steam (usually a pacific) or sometimes diesel
Fourth leg behind brand new diesels (E7 or F2A/B)
Fifth leg behind steam to the outskirts of the destination city (pacific or mountain), sometimes with an engine change en route
Sixth leg behind an electric into the destination terminal
As time went on, the electric into the terminal was dropped, the fifth leg got diesels. Describing changes to the second and third legs would give it away entirely. Most of the route is operated for passenger service today.
I don't find anything I wrote that I think could imply that the tTennisean "was not the answer." To what are you referring?
The Tennesean was unique in many ways. But the Broadway almost always for a eLimited, on occasion, the 20th Century Limited, almost always for a while, and Empire State Limited, all started with electric power at one end of the line and ended with streamlined steam at the other.
The Tennesean was unique with Road A, Road B, then back to Road A.
Swap between two streamlined steamers (at Bristol).
Later, When an Alco PA took over from the streamlined Pacific, diesel - steam - diesel was unique on a regular basis, although probably did occur at times on the western transcons.
Look forward to your question.
Just to be sure it's understood that rcdrye is up -- he answered it Monday at 6:05pm, before I'd had the chance to read the question. In fact I only mentioned the Meteor because Mr. Klepper seemed to be saying the Tennessean was not the answer, and there are few trains indeed that involved a PRR electric at one end and streamlined steam elsewhere.
A notable point that has been made in posts here in the past was the 'fun' on N&W with allowing Southern diesels to 'run through' between Monroe and Bristol -- the first diesels allowed on N&W, iirc.
1948 OG does not list coaches, and does not list a Boston sleeper, though the connecting PRR train that carried the New York Pullman did originate in Boston.
FWIW the other pre-war Southern Railway lightweight coach train was the Southerner, operating on the route of today's Southern Crescent.
That is why four engine changes, five locomotives, not three changes, and four locomotves. But actually six and five: New Haven, New York, DC Monroe, Bristol, between Boston and Memphis.
But, to be honest, I had made an error and should have written three engne changes, since all but one sleeper had New York City as the northen end-point.
I understand that in the post-WWII prtiod, there were times when through coaches also operated.
Yes, Southern streamlined one PS-4 Pacifiic for the Bristol - Memphis round-trip.
you are uo.
Southern
HAS to be 'The Tennessean' as rcdrye has already said. PRR electric to Washington, then Southern to Monroe, then N&W J or K to Bristol, then the bespoke Otto Kuhler-streamlined Ps-4. (Later there might have been DL-109s or PAs, and still later bulldog-nosed E and FP units, on that last stretch...)
If you can scroll past some home-movie people shots, there is some good running showing the Kuhler 'reverse' paint scheme here:
https://vimeo.com/230640412
I had thought the actual Tennessean originated in Washington, with only the through New York sleeper(s) in a connecting PRR train. It occurs to me that, since the connecting schedule also lists service to Boston, that you might include one more streamlined steam engine and change to electric, for the New Haven part...
Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!
Get the Classic Trains twice-monthly newsletter