G Scale Model Train Forum banner
Cancel
Create thread New Forums

How many F1 units pulled a passenger train?

Jump to Latest
1 - 16 of 16 Posts

Westcott

· Registered
Joined
·
100 Posts
Discussion starter · #1 ·
Hi all,
 
Back in the days when F1s pulled real passenger trains, how many heavyweight cars could be pulled by one F1 unit?
 
I'm thinking of expresses on fairly flat lines, like the PRR.
My guess would be about 3 cars per unit, so a 9-car train would need 3 F1 units?
 
Also, could such trains have included express boxcars or reefers?
 
Hamish
 
#2 ·
In Canada, the introduction of F units in passenger service did not occur until the 1950's coincident with large orders of streamlined cars. There were however still some heavyweight cars around predominantly headend cars but others as well. The F units were not fully supreme in passenger service here till the very late 50s so routinely hauled trains that were mostly streamlined cars.

There was a rule of thumb that the CN used for these assignments that worked both in the Quebec - Windsor corridor and also the two transcon mains to Halifax and Vancouver. An F unit was assigned 6 cars in summer but only 5 in winter. This was a rough and ready rule and often trains were underpowered especially on the transcon runs where speeds did not exceed 35 mph for hundreds and hundreds of miles.

Regards ... Doug
 
#4 ·
On the SP Daylight the maximum consist for many if not most of its earlier life was 20 cars. This was pulled usually by either 3 E units or 3 Alco PA units of 2,000 hp each for a total of 6,000 hp. Configuration could be either A-B-A or A-B-B. These units had 3 axle trucks as compared with 2 axle trucks for the F units.

The F units except for the earlier FT units (mostly just used in freight) were of 1500 hp each which would equate to 4 units to get 6,000 hp. That would mean 5 cars per unit which agrees with what Doug posted for the CNR. Passenger trains were generally "overpowered" in order to keep up schedules. Tight schedules such as on commuter lines required a lot of power especially to allow for quicker acceleration between their many stops.

There were many exceptions to the above certainly as I'm sure some will point out. The above is a general rule of thumb only.
 
#5 ·
I should have added a point about motive power assignments. F units were routinely used in passenger service (equipped with steam generators and passenger lines) only by Cabadian railroads plus some mountain climbing western American roads. The majoroty of American railroads preferred to use 6 axled power in passenger service. This included locos like PA's from Alco and the E's from EMD. The Pennsy was cited in the original post and while I am sure someone can post pics of Pennsy F units in passenger service, the PRR preferred other options than its freight locos.

The original post referred to heavyweights. The last heavyweights built new in the USA hit the tracks in the very early 30s though of course a great many were rebuilt during the Depression. By the 1950s when the covered wagons were king, heavyweights were pretty long in the tooth. The rapid decline in rail passenger travel post World War II meant that most heavyweights were pushed from frontline service and a good many had been scrapped or demoted to work train service by the mid to late 50s.

On the question of speed of passenger schedules, Canadian geography plays its role. Both CPR and CNR moved trains at speed in the Quebec City Windsor corridor. The pool trains between Ottawa, Montreal and Toronto were fast and frequent. But on the transcontinental run, the 1400 mile stretch from Montreal to Winnipeg rarely saw speeds above 35 mph and west of Calgary or Edmonton, there was almost 600 miles of very slow mountain running. Similarly, the 800 mile run from Montreal to Halifax has only a few stretches where the train can move fast with the vast majority run at 35 mph. Even VIA Rail's schedule today reflects the sharp curves and difficult terrain of the Canadian Shield country or the climb of the Rockies. Only those people who are taking a "cruise" type holiday travel across Canada by rail today in preference to flying but flying was not really an option for any but the most affluent business traveller in the 1950s.
Regards ... Doug
 
#6 ·
(just because im a nitpicker! ;)
technically there was never a "F1" unit..

EMD had "F-units" which came in many different models, FT, F3, F7 and F9 being the most numerous..
a B unit would be a F3B or F7B, etc..A-units generally didnt get an "A" designation..an A unit was simply an "EMD F7"..

These were mostly Freight units.
Passenger versions of the EMD F-units got a "P" designation, such as FP7..they had a steam generator, and often different gearing,
for passenger service, but still had 4 axle trucks.

EMD's primary passenger units were the E-units..E3, E7, E9, etc..
all E-units were built as passenger units, and had A-1-A 6-axle trucks.

Alco had the FA as its primary freight unit, and the PA as its primary passenger unit..
there were some FA's equipped for passenger service, and they were called Alco (or MLW) FPA units..
B units of the Alcos were called FB or PB units..
you also had different "generations" of the Alcos..such as FA-1, PA1, followed by the upgraded FA-2 and PA-2.

EMD didnt use a "dash-2" designation until much later..
for Cab units, instead a "EMD F7-2" (which never existed) the upgraded evolutionary successor to the F3 was the F7..
and the F7 was replaced by the F9..(same with the E-units)

there were some exceptions to the above..but that covers about 95% of freight and passenger cab units.

Scot
 
#7 ·
Westcott, Scot is quite right about there being no F1s, they were FTs . They were freight engines; an A and a B were connected with a drawbar and neither one had a steam generator which was necessary if passenger cars were to be hauled.

Production of the FT ended in 1945 - a little over 1000 1350HP units. The F2 came out in '46 and only 74 A units were built and just 30 B units.

The F3 came out in '45 before the F2 and was more powerful, 1500HP. Both the F2 and F3 could be had with steam generators.

The F7 and F9 (1750HP) could be had in a longer version with larger water tanks and these were the FP7 and the FP9.

As Scot said, one seldom said "an F7A": F7 was sufficient. But if the consist had 2 or more units, they would be mentioned - ABA, ABB, ABBA, etc.

This kind of info can be gleaned from Kalmbach's "Diesel Locomotives: The First 50 Years".

Art
 
#8 ·
I'm guessing the original question was referring to Aristo Craft FA's. The first models were FA1's, hence where F1 came from...just a guess though.

Unfortunately the railroads I model never had them so I'm not going to be much help. But this might be of some use:

Alco FAs
 
#9 ·
If we're talking about ALCOs, an FA1 had no room for a steam generator. The FB1 had room for a steam generator where the cab would have been located if it had been an A unit.

So a protoype passenger train would have to have an FB1 coupled behind the FA1 to provide steam. Now I can't tell if you could run an ABA consist. Did FA1s have a steam line running end to end?

Art
 
#10 ·
Westscott,
Got a lot of rivet counters in your neck of the woods?
The Santa Fe usually added an extra PA to the consist in case one broke down.... not for power, they were brutes .
My memory may cloud the facts, but I read where the demostrator set was red light stopped on a grade with a full train (16 cars), plus a dynometer car. The crew expected to double the hill (take it up in 2 sections), but the Alco man on board said Go and it accelerated up the hill.

I'd say 4 to 5 heavyweights and if a rivet counter asks tell him it's an early tunnel motor and the boiler is vented between the rails!

It was a nice history lesson, but it is your railroad and you can tell your riders to wear extra woolies if they want heat! AC units ran off a car axle.

John
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#11 ·
Hamish

I noted that every one focused on your locomotive question and skipped over the use of express box cars or reefers in the [as you say in the UK] train formations.

The more prominent NAMED trains like the Twentieth Century Limited [NYC], Broad Way Limited [PRR], Morning Daylight [SP], North Coast Limited [NP] TYPICALLY had no extra head end cars. Many of the lesser passenger trains would have some storage mail or exprees included. When the railroads handled nearly all the cross county mail in the US, the bigger railroads had scheduled mail trains that carried mail, express, express reefers, and often a single coach tagged on the end. These trains ran on expedited schedules that rivalled passenger service. Think of the Royal Mail trains and TPOs of the LMS and GWR and the "newspaper trains" of the Southern Railway prior to British Rail, before 1947.

SO, a two or three cars might be appropriate in your train. AS THEY SAY, "It's your railroad".

Regards
 
#12 ·
Loads of info here but a further question is on the placement of a steam generator car in the consist?where was it placed? After the locos and ahead of all other cars ? Between locos? After baggage or other headend equipment?

Dave
 
#13 ·
Dave

The placement of the steam generator car, if the consist had one, depended on several factors. First, the norm for trains equipped with steam train lines and so on was to locate the steam genny right behind the locos ... as all cars could transmit the steam power.

Several factors need to be considered for special situations.

First, keep in mind the steam era for passenger cars lasted from the introduction of diesels through to about 1980 ... by that time most passenger equipment had been converted to HEP. Steam gennies were used when the diesels were freight units (not equipped for steam passenger cars to either pass the steam power or generate it) or at times when the steam supply from the passenger diesels was insufficient. In winter (at say -20F) for example, each car could draw down 5-8 pounds of steam pressure for heat taxing the steam supply from passenger diesels. In these cases, the non passenger equipped locos led ... and passenger locos plus steam genny trailed but in front of the passenger cars. steam gennies normally did not have MU controls so the locos in an MU'ed consist ran in front of the steam genny.

If the train was a mixed train - (and yes even today there are a few mixed trains on Class I's ... the Ontario Northland Super Bear is a prime example) then the steam genny may be placed between the freight section and the coach section or alternately, the steam genny may trail the coach section. In any case, the freight equipment will not pass the steam along the train so the steam genny must be located adjacent to the passenger equipment. Although the ONR uses HEP'ed equipment today on the Super Bear, a rebuilt F3B supplies the power just as a steam genny would do and it is located behind the coach section but in front of the ATV car and the boxcar used for mail storage.

I am not aware of a train that located the steam genny between revenue passenger carrying cars. Maybe someone knows of an example ... perhaps a train to be split along its journey?

Regards ... Doug
 
#15 ·
Doug,
Thanks for the response. I was pretty sure it would have to be next to the pass. cars, but was not sure if express reefers or baggage cars would be equiped for the steam line. From your description I get the impression that if any express cars in consist than it would go between those and the pass equipment. Baggage included in pass cars.

Dave
 
#16 ·
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
About this Discussion
15 Replies
12 Participants
Last post:
altterrain
G Scale Model Train Forum
posts
460K
members
32K
Since
2007
A forum community dedicated to G scale model train owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about collections, displays, models, styles, scales, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
Live Steam General G Scale Discussions Beginner's Forum Model Making Track, Trestles, Bridges and Roadbed