daveklepperIn my time as a NYNH&H passenger, and somewhat involved with the MIT crew team, I was aware that the New Haven continued to run these special trains. But regular coaches were used, post WWII, mostly "america Flyers, 300-series/
There is an article from the Harvard Crimson that describes plans to start the trains up again in 1950, which eould have been the first 'postwar' year, with wide-window air-conditioned cars -- one set coming down from Boston, one up from New Haven and perhaps New York, to be combined for operation.
https://www.thecrimson.com/article/1950/3/30/new-haven-rr-may-restore-observation/
New York Times story (from 1980) says among other things that the last Harvard-Yale trains ran in 1969:
https://www.nytimes.com/1982/06/06/nyregion/yale-crew-seen-over-harvard.html (paywall may be up to view this)
I'm too lazy to find primary sources for the IRA 'competition' regatta on the Hudson at Poughkeepsie after 1891, so here is the introduction:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poughkeepsie_Regatta
Note that the IRA moved its venue off the Hudson the same year the New Haven trains were re-introduced out of New London. Much more recently 'collegiate' boating events on the Hudson have been renewed (notably between Columbia and Princeton)
All the sets of 'regatta cars' I've seen have the same general layout, which is 'bleacher' seating on the flatcar deck, facing one side. The New Haven cars have three levels the length of the car, with a pipe railing framework and some form of wire enclosure for safery most of the way around. Entrance is through a gap in the center of the 'viewing' side, presumably with the race fans clambering over the bleachers to get seated. I do not know what arrangements were provided on race trains for the 'elderly' or differently-abled; I suspect there were more regular passenger cars somewhere in the trains. Someone may scan the picture in New Haven Power for 'fair use' or can find a comparable picture already online and 'permitted'.
OvermodAll the sets of 'regatta cars' I've seen have the same general layout, which is 'bleacher' seating on the flatcar deck, facing one side. The New Haven cars have three levels the length of the car, with a pipe railing framework and some form of wire enclosure for safery most of the way around. Entrance is through a gap in the center of the 'viewing' side, presumably with the race fans clambering over the bleachers to get seated. I do not know what arrangements were provided on race trains for the 'elderly' or differently-abled; I suspect there were more regular passenger cars somewhere in the trains. Someone may scan the picture in New Haven Power for 'fair use' or can find a comparable picture already online and 'permitted'.
I can't believe I found this from YouTube:
https://hvmag.com/publications/rowing-is-on-the-rise-in-the-hudson-valley/
Jones 3D Modeling Club https://www.youtube.com/Jones3DModelingClub
Well-done all around! And note whose cars... in what number series... are shown as running along the River 'on the Heights'! That car in the middle of the train, with the cupola, is purpose-built too, and it would be interesting to know both its provenance and its uses.
Here's a Classic Trains question: what are they doing with the Great Steel Fleet while all those people mill around the two westernmost tracks? Turns out to be simple... that's the West Shore, not the Hudson River Railroad.
See this view which has a brief view of a train across the river:
https://vimeo.com/225677511
There is much more room inside those bleacher cars than I'd have thought from the still pictures. That, or crew fans were smaller than today's.
Note the views from the Poughkeepsie Bridge.
Incidentally, the IRA went to Marietta in 1950 largely because B&O offered to run trains where NYC did not. And it seems the Lehigh Valley ran comparable equipment along Cayuga Lake for Cornell...
Where did the Central's bleacher trains originate? Could not have been Grasn Central Terminal.
daveklepperWhere did the Central's bleacher trains originate?
From the ladders I see deployed, I'm pretty sure these were boarded shortly before race time, and as promptly abandoned afterward. It was the postwar proposed New Haven trains that would come all the way from Boston (presumably South Station and Back Bay) and New York (GCT and perhaps Penn) to be combined into one consist to run along the river.
If the Central's bleacher trains used the West Shore, Weehawken would have not been a problem for boarding.
It would likely have been agony riding sideways all that way, to say nothing of bathroom stops enroute.
I have never seen an indication that the bleacher cars were used by the public for anything more than actually following the races -- they got in via the ladders, with assist from the kinds of people seen in some of the pictures, and at the end of each race they got out again.
I'm still looking forward to seeing details of the judges' arrangements.
In 1928 this interurban ordered two dual voltage (600/1200) steeplecab freight locomotives from GE even though the line was only equipped for 600 volts. Name the railroad and the reason for ordering the dual-voltage motors.
Could be Central California Traction for through operation on the Sacramento Northern south of Sacramento. And possibly the two WP-owned lines shared power.
Although CCT did meet SN at Sacramento, there is no record of through operation. CCT was jointly owned by WP and AT&SF. The year 1928 is important.
Sacramento Northern purchased two GE 60 ton motors that year, and it would have been smart to so equip them in anticipation of the upcoming merger with the San Francisco-Sacramento (formerly the OA&E), which was completed that same year.
From what I can gather online the 'north end' of the merged system was mostly 600v third rail, while the 'south end' used 1200v overhead.
It looks like a third steeplecab was ordered at the same time, but was not delivered until several years later.
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
The north end was third rail except in towns: i Sacramento, Yuba City, and Chico, where SN operated local streetcar servic, until after WWII, outlasting the interurban passenger sercice.
Thanks for the correct answer to a good question.
The south end was all 1200V overhead wire except 600V wire in Sacramento, 600V third rail on the Bay Bridge, and a short stretch of 600V overhead wire Key System track that SN had to use between their tracks and the Bay Bridge.
Parent Western Pacific had SN order the heavily-equipped steeplecabs in anticipation of merging SN And San Fancisco-Sacramento (former Oakland Antioch & Eastern).
SN removed the third rail shoes on equipment operating on the former OA&E south of Sacramento. In Key Pier days before the Bay Bridge opened SN trains changed voltage settings at 40th and Shafter in Oakland. In something of a reverse of most of the industry, SN used poles on the 1200/1500 volt overhead for passenger trains, and pantographs on Key System's 600 volt overhead. In the Bay Bridge years, no voltage settings changes were made, with SN trains operated set up for 1200 volts on Key's 600 volt wire to the Bay Bridge yards, where they joined the 1200-volt overhead also used by SP's Interurban Electric. SN Freight motors used pans almost exclusively, though some also had poles.
GE seems to have built the third unit in 1928, but it wasn't delivered until 1930.
Your question(s).
A class of 10 steam locomotives were the only engines of their wheel arrangement to be built new in North America, the wheel arrangement was named after the purchasing railroad.
They also had a booster on the tender's front truck.
What is the wheel arrangement and name?
SD70Dude A class of 10 steam locomotives were the only engines of their wheel arrangement to be built new in North America, the wheel arrangement was named after the purchasing railroad. They also had a booster on the tender's front truck. What is the wheel arrangement and name?
As I recall, that's an 'auxiliary locomotive' on the tender, not a 'booster'. Bethlehem could not use a Franklin name... (yes, there was legal action about this back in the day!)
Overmod Union 0-10-2
Union 0-10-2
Correct.
Auxiliary locomotive is a far better name than booster anyway!
Here's 303 brand new at Eddystone:
https://railpictures.net/photo/773574/
Like any heavy switcher or hump pusher, the proportions always seem a bit off. It may be due to the lack of a pony truck.
The auxiliary locomotive was a fairly lousy solution, as it turned out; the quartered rods couldn't be (or weren't) effectively cross-balanced to run 'idle' at higher speeds even with the engine out of gear.
At least one railroad (Southern) used TWO three-axle (!) motored trucks under a tender - as I recall, coupled to a 2-10-2 - in what might have been the only practical possible service for the arrangement... hump duty. There was at least one picture. I do not remember the draft arrangements but I'll bet they were 'unsatisfactory' ...
Of course if you want to see the thing done with full engineering, go to the land of superfluous engineering: see the tender of T38-3255 (the ineffable Douglas Self, of course, has an account of it). Instead of wasting exhaust, let's condense it on the tender... but, hmmmm... if we have marine-style condensation effectiveness, why not build a booster turbine on a couple of tender axles that could extract power from the exhaust steam? (Perhaps needless to say, this was not what auxiliary locomotives could do!)
This is far less nuts than it appears today; consider the Parsons Reaction Turbine on Titanic, which made enormous shp on steam entirely below atmospheric pressure.
It was clear to me as a boy why this made far less economic than thermodynamic sense... connected in most ways to effective condenser limits. The experiment perfectly spanned the early research on ultrafast steam locomotives about this size, which are almost a poster child for the effective range extension at 'above scooping speed' that the arrangement would provide as well as the augment-free boosting... but you'd want speed gears in the tender. If I could figure that out at age 15, I'm reasonably sure the German engineers behind the tender looked carefully at this in some of their high-speed design from the very early '30s on. (If Juniatha were here I'm sure she'd be familiar with what was done then and why, but no.)
...and Union only had 9 of them (301-309). C&NW had a pair rebuilt from CStPM&O 2-10-2's.
Sure looks like a 2-10-2 where someone swiped the poney truck!
It seems the pony trucks were derailing as the 2-10-2's crested the Proviso Yard hump where they were used as pushers (they didn't go OVER the hump, just up to the crest...). Pony truck removed, problem solved!
rcdrye ...and Union only had 9 of them (301-309). C&NW had a pair rebuilt from CStPM&O 2-10-2's.
Yeah, I guess I misread the number series. No 300.
One survives, and is on display in Greenville, Pennsylvania:
https://www.steamlocomotive.info/vlocomotive.cfm?Display=1016
Not a very good candidate for restoration to operation for excursion service?
daveklepperNot a very good candidate for restoration to operation for excursion service?
Overmod daveklepper Not a very good candidate for restoration to operation for excursion service? I think the real problem is not so much that you can't run excursions with no lead truck as it is that you have all the 'care and feeding' expenses of a 2-10-2 with the speed and service restrictions on top.
daveklepper Not a very good candidate for restoration to operation for excursion service?
I think the real problem is not so much that you can't run excursions with no lead truck as it is that you have all the 'care and feeding' expenses of a 2-10-2 with the speed and service restrictions on top.
While it would rather expensive to restore and operate, a 0-10-2 could be well suited to a excursion line with good track, big heavy trains and steep grades that would require slow speeds and high power requirements at those low speeds.
But the only line I can think of that fits that bill already has their hands full with a 2-6-6-2, which is an even better option than the surviving Union.
This is a post WWII passenger question.
Five lightweight sleepers were named for a southeastern state. The owner ship was divided by three railroads. Name the prefixes of the five cars and the originating and end terminals.a
Happy researching.
Ed Burns
While researching, what did two PRR horse cars and a 32-seat obs on the Congo, a 36-seat GN dining car, a Southern 56-seat chair car, a B&O business car and 8-section buffet lounge, and a Wagner palace car have in common?
No prefixes, but extra points for suffixes...
No horse cars, but look to southeast USA.
Couldn't find any prefixes, but the following five were built for Dixie Route Florida Service in 1954 to Plan 4196 (4 sec 4 rmt 5 DBR 1Cpt):
Florida Sunset
Florida Surf
Florid Flowers
Florida Lakes
Florida Traveler
The first two went to the NC&StL, the next two to the C&EI, the fifth to the L&N.
Haven't looked at Overmod's list yet...
The other four Plan 4196 Pullmans outshopped at the same time:
Camellia
Gardenia
Jamaica
Scott M Loftin
First two went to ACL, the other two to FEC (Scott Loftin was a former bankruptcy trustee of the FEC).
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