Hi Guys
Could someone tell me on a 1970s main line passenger train how many passenger cars would be pulled behind the loco on a normal day to day service.
Kind Regards Gary yemm
It depends on the area the train is serving. Some trains were still multiple E units with long trains while other trains were a GP7 or GP9 (possibly an E unit or RS-3) hauling a short train. Some areas still had RDCs in service on trains. Commuter trains in parts of New Jersey and Chicago were fitted to run in either direction without turning the entire train. The Chicago cars are easy to find while the New Jersey cars (and locos) are long out of production.
Another thing to consider is the type of passenger cars used. Bi-levels carry almost twice the passenger load of single-level cars. So trains of these were generally shorter.
Examples of intercity bi-level cars would be C&NW bi-level intercity cars; Santa Fe El Capitan cars; and AMTRAK Superliner cars.
Think of the services your trains would offer, and select cars that would provide those services to your passengers, in addition to the basic (coach) cars.
Les
Hi Guys
Thanks for the info and pointing me in the right direction.
Kind Regards Gary Yemm
1970s also means at least two very different things, namely pre-Amtrak and Amtrak. For the most part, after Amtrak formed, most of the trains were still relatively long, as only the relatively successful (least unsuccessful?) routes survived. The few independents - such as the Southern Crescent - also were relatively long. From memory I remember the mid-1970s Crescent being at least 8+ cars, long enough to be "a real passenger train." So were the primary Amtrak routes.
Pre-Amtrak, there were a considerable number of "stubs" running as pale ghosts of their predecessors. Some of the once-great trains were sometimes running as a single car with a GP-9, particularly some sections. For example, the C&O's flagship, the George Washington, had once rated two sections across the whole railroad, and even after WWII some of those were 18 or even 20 cars. By 1971 but still pre-Amtrak, the George ran west to east in a single section of at least 3 cars and usually a bit more. When it split into the Washington and Newport News sections at Charlottesville, VA, the Newport News section went on as a single car with a GP. Other sections ran similarly, if they had not yet been discontinued. All of these "runts" were discontinued by Amtrak. The situation was similar on other railroads pre-Amtrak, although I don't know the details.
And if going for Amtrak, don't be afraid to have cars from outside your prototype area appear. If modeling the west, Penn Central, C&O, and SCL cars would be mixed into consists while on the east you'd have UP, GN, NP, ATSF, BN, MILW (in UP colors), Mopac, and SP cars mixed into the consists.
To add on to Ken, in one of my books I remember seeing a picture with an Amtrak and B&O Engines on the head of a 5 car train most of which were different roads.
Quote from: Gary Yemm on September 24, 2012, 10:12:35 AM
Hi Guys
Could someone tell me on a 1970s main line passenger train how many passenger cars would be pulled behind the loco on a normal day to day service.
Kind Regards Gary yemm
Isn't this a bit like asking "How long is a piece of string?"?
I'd suggest you look a photos of your favourite prototype(s). If you don't own or can't afford books, which can get expensive, then a trip to your local library will do the trick.
Photos are almost always better than the generic (although sometimes helpful) answers you will get on this forum.
Quote from: Desertdweller on September 24, 2012, 12:56:40 PM
Bi-levels carry almost twice the passenger load of single-level cars. So trains of these were generally shorter.
Examples of intercity bi-level cars would be C&NW bi-level intercity cars; Santa Fe El Capitan cars; and AMTRAK Superliner cars.
Les-
You have to separate intercity cars from commuter cars. Many railroads, the C&NW being just one excellent example, ran bi-level cars with huge capacities though not double those of single level cars. Intercity trains like the Santa Fe Cap were not
bilevel; they were
high level. The difference is that passengers were on the upper level only except for access to the Kachina Room coffee shop on the lower level of the lounge car. All of the other cars were designed with lower levels which carried power equipment for lights, heat and air conditioning; baggage; bathrooms; and, in the case of the diner, the kitchen and food storage. The high level Santa Fe coaches did have large capacities, up to 80 passengers, but that was because the passenger level had no space-eating bathrooms.
The current high level cars on Amtrak, both chair cars and sleepers, do have passengers on their lower levels; however, this is very limited because the lower levels still include power generation equipment, bathrooms and baggage space.
Turning to the IP's question, the length of passenger trains was/is a function of anticipated passenger load. It's expensive to haul empty cars around and to do maintenance on them if they aren't generating any revenue. Thus, trains were/are consistently longer in the summer and around holidays, especially the Christmas-New Years time. They were/are also somewhat longer when their runs start on Thursdays, Fridays and Saturdays, because more people start and end vacations on those days. (Business travelers aren't much of a factor on intercity trains anymore.) To return to the AT&SF El Capitan as an example, by the 1960s the Cap ran as a physical part of the Super Chief; both trains were numbered 17/18. Although they were all part of the same long train, they had separate diners and lounges, and the Super had dome cars which, of course, the Cap didn't need since it was all high level.
In the summer and at the end of the year, the Cap ran as a separate section (train) on the same schedule as the Super. As a long-distance train, the Cap often ran with empty or near empty cars during the busy season. The reason is that railroads just don't have all kinds of expensive extra cars sitting around. A train leaving Chicago on a Tuesday or Wednesday might have only 75 - 80% of its seats filled (middle of the week) but it would be loaded returning from Los Angeles on Friday or Saturday. The westbound train would drag the equivalent of an empty chair car or two to LA for the large numbers of eastbound passengers on the return trip.
The details of how different railroads and different trains ran and were staged differ depending on the length of run and equipment availability but all were guided by anticipated passenger loads.
The principle applies to some degree to commuter service as well. Rush hour trains are generally longer than midday or evening trains. There are exceptions to this of course, especially when one end of the run (most likely the downtown end) lacks space to mass cars for the outbound afternoon rush. In that case, non-rush hour trains may remain long all day so the capacity will be shuttling into downtown for the rush.
-- D
typical amtrak consists through pittsburgh about 1980 (when i started keeping records) would have been 10-12 heritage cars on the broadway limited (ny to chicago) and 2 or 3 amfleet cars on the pennsylvanian (pgh to ny)..... motive power was f40phs, 2 on the broadway, and 1 on the pennsylvanian. back the date up a couple of years and amtrak e8s powered everything.
Quote from: Ken S. on September 24, 2012, 01:55:17 PM
And if going for Amtrak, don't be afraid to have cars from outside your prototype area appear. If modeling the west, Penn Central, C&O, and SCL cars would be mixed into consists while on the east you'd have UP, GN, NP, ATSF, BN, MILW (in UP colors), Mopac, and SP cars mixed into the consists.
Ken, just to clarify, are east and west passenger car consists switched in your message?
Thanks,
Quote from: ripvanwnkl on September 25, 2012, 10:09:39 AM
Quote from: Ken S. on September 24, 2012, 01:55:17 PM
And if going for Amtrak, don't be afraid to have cars from outside your prototype area appear. If modeling the west, Penn Central, C&O, and SCL cars would be mixed into consists while on the east you'd have UP, GN, NP, ATSF, BN, MILW (in UP colors), Mopac, and SP cars mixed into the consists.
Ken, just to clarify, are east and west passenger car consists switched in your message?
Thanks,
I'm referring to Amtrak Rainbow Era consists.
Quote from: Ken S. on September 25, 2012, 10:13:05 AM
Quote from: ripvanwnkl on September 25, 2012, 10:09:39 AM
Quote from: Ken S. on September 24, 2012, 01:55:17 PM
And if going for Amtrak, don't be afraid to have cars from outside your prototype area appear. If modeling the west, Penn Central, C&O, and SCL cars would be mixed into consists while on the east you'd have UP, GN, NP, ATSF, BN, MILW (in UP colors), Mopac, and SP cars mixed into the consists.
Ken, just to clarify, are east and west passenger car consists switched in your message?
Thanks,
I'm referring to Amtrak Rainbow Era consists.
Ken, hes talking about the Road names, you put Penn Central, C&O and SCL on the west coast and UP ATSF etc on the East Coast......
and yes Ripvan he switched em by accident.
A few more things to consider here.
The AT&SF Super Chief was a first-class only train. The AT&SF El Cap was a coach-class only train. When they operated as a single train, the two were not combined. Their consists were instead coupled together as two individual sets of cars. The El Cap was all high-level, the Super Chief was all conventional level cars. For this reason, each train carried its own diner and lounge.
The C&NW had a separate pool of bi-level long distance cars that operated apart from their bi-level commuter cars, although the two groups looked much the same externally.
Some conventional height cars were modified with tall false roofs to match the height of the bi-level cars.
The Milwaukee Road and the CB&Q had bi-level commuter cars that were sometimes used in intercity operations in times of extreme demand.
Eastern-road cars did show up in the West, and western-road cars did show up in the East. But tall western cars, like hi-levels and dome cars, could not be operated in the East because of height clearances. The few dome cars that were used in the East were specially constructed with low-clearance domes.
The initial months of AMTRAK would be a great time to model for people who like to mix up a lot of color schemes. AMTRAK, although they carefully chose what cars they wanted to keep (they were accepted in partial payment from railroads participating in AMTRAK) initially had to operate with whatever was available, including old heavyweight cars. It was well over a year before these were sorted out and the keepers overhauled and painted.
Same for the locomotives. A few got a slap-dash paint job for initial publicity photos.
Many were leased from the railroads until AMTRAK could get their own fleet up and running. AMTRAK wound up no road Diesels older than E-8's, but at start-up had leased many older units.
There are several good books on the market that cover this period. I suggest "Journey to AMTRAK" by Kalmbach for starters.
Les
Quote from: BaltoOhioRRfan on September 25, 2012, 10:25:03 AM
Quote from: Ken S. on September 25, 2012, 10:13:05 AM
Quote from: ripvanwnkl on September 25, 2012, 10:09:39 AM
Quote from: Ken S. on September 24, 2012, 01:55:17 PM
And if going for Amtrak, don't be afraid to have cars from outside your prototype area appear. If modeling the west, Penn Central, C&O, and SCL cars would be mixed into consists while on the east you'd have UP, GN, NP, ATSF, BN, MILW (in UP colors), Mopac, and SP cars mixed into the consists.
Ken, just to clarify, are east and west passenger car consists switched in your message?
Thanks,
I'm referring to Amtrak Rainbow Era consists.
Ken, hes talking about the Road names, you put Penn Central, C&O and SCL on the west coast and UP ATSF etc on the East Coast......
and yes Ripvan he switched em by accident.
I gave examples of how Amtrak mixed up which railroad's cars went where. Many UP sleepers found their way to Sunnyside Yard during the Rainbow Era.
Like this JW Riley with a B&O E leading UP cars (http://www.bcoolidge.com/Amtrak_71-75_Pix/JW%20Riley%20Ex-UP%20Equipment%20Chicago%204_72edited.jpg).
Thanks for the clarification, Ken S. I stand corrected. During the Amtrak Rainbow Era, apparently it was anything goes if it was available and "goable".
Quote from: Desertdweller on September 25, 2012, 11:02:35 AM
The El Cap was all high-level, the Super Chief was all conventional level cars. For this reason, each train carried its own diner and lounge.
Les-
This not strictly true. There were transition coaches on each end of the Cap (It was
never referred to as the "El Cap" except when Walthers released their new set last year) so there was no difficulty whatsoever involved in moving between the two parts of the joined #17 and #18. However, the Santa Fe prohibited passengers moving from one part of the train to another because it made it easier to keep track of them and to keep the sleeper passengers from having to come into contact with the riff-raff from the coaches. Also, the train operated with a single conductor. I know all of this because my father was one of the first Stewards when the hi-level equipment was introduced and I worked the train myself as a college summer job.
In regards to that, let me say that it was by far the toughest job I ever had, rather like walking from Chicago to Los Angeles and back while remaining balanced on a moving train. My job was quite a bit more physically demanding than was my Dad's, but I was doing it on a young man's legs and he was in his 50s. I came to respect him a lot more after my own experience on the trains.
-- D
Remember too there would multiple engines on an inter-city train. Perhaps 3-4 F units and 12-14 cars.
Doneldon,
That's right. There were transition coaches, but the coach and first-class passengers were kept separate. Each group effectively had their own train.
WJS,
There would be multiple locomotives, for several reasons. Considering that AMTRAK meant the demise of over half the long-distance trains, the survivors had the combined passenger traffic of the eliminated trains to carry (if the route itself survived).
Also, AMTRAK had to make do with many well-worn locomotives that were not the most dependable. New replacement passenger power purchased by the railroads was retained by them and converted to freight use.
I recall seeing in Minnesota AMTRAK E-8A's converted to steam generator units, with steam generators installed in the cabs and the windshields blanked!
Meanwhile, railroad-owned passenger units were re-geared for freight use or used in commuter service.
Les
Quote from: Doneldon on September 25, 2012, 02:58:50 PM
This not strictly true. There were transition coaches on each end of the Cap (It was never referred to as the "El Cap" except when Walthers released their new set last year) so there was no difficulty whatsoever involved in moving between the two parts of the joined #17 and #18. However, the Santa Fe prohibited passengers moving from one part of the train to another because it made it easier to keep track of them and to keep the sleeper passengers from having to come into contact with the riff-raff from the coaches. Also, the train operated with a single conductor. I know all of this because my father was one of the first Stewards when the hi-level equipment was introduced and I worked the train myself as a college summer job.
In regards to that, let me say that it was by far the toughest job I ever had, rather like walking from Chicago to Los Angeles and back while remaining balanced on a moving train. My job was quite a bit more physically demanding than was my Dad's, but I was doing it on a young man's legs and he was in his 50s. I came to respect him a lot more after my own experience on the trains.
-- D
I imagine it can still be very demanding. When I traveled on the
Empire Builder three summers' ago, I was deeply impressed by the young fellow who was the attendant on my sleeper. He was working constantly. He had two completely filled sleepers to care for by himself, yet he was always friendly and cheerful, and we had fresh flowers by the coffee station (which I suspect he may have provided on his own because I've never seen them on other trains where I've traveled in sleeper) and deodorizers in the rest rooms.
Quote from: Johnson Bar Jeff on September 26, 2012, 02:05:07 PM
I imagine it can still be very demanding. When I traveled on the Empire Builder three summers' ago, I was deeply impressed by the young fellow who was the attendant on my sleeper. He was working constantly. He had two completely filled sleepers to care for by himself, yet he was always friendly and cheerful, and we had fresh flowers by the coffee station (which I suspect he may have provided on his own because I've never seen them on other trains where I've traveled in sleeper) and deodorizers in the rest rooms.
Jeff-
I think you're right. My wife, two grandsons and I made a great circling train trip from Minneapolis to Chicago to Los Angeles to Portland to Glacier to Minneapolis a couple of years ago, with an intergenerational ElderHostel in the middle, and the whole crew seemed to be working pretty hard while remaining laudably cheerful. I suppose everybody understands that railroad construction crews work very hard but I don't think they understand that the hard work and danger apply to operating personnel, too. The cab of a steam locomotive which seems so romantic today was really a horrible and dangerous place to work. Walking a train, performing switch duties and just riding on the outside of a train were all awful work and dangerous to boot. Throw in separation from home and family and it starts to become a mystery that anyone would do such work. My Dad was away for five days at a time and could count on being doubled out the same day or the next day during the summers and holiday rush times. I can't remember a single Christmas when he was home and the only way we ever saw him in the summer was to move to Los Angeles from late May until early September so he could work a special W-Su train which ran from LA to the race track at Del Mar. There were some good parts of that: touring a lot of the west and missing some school at the beginnings and ends of each year.
-- D
Quote from: Doneldon on September 26, 2012, 04:41:43 PM
Jeff-
I think you're right. My wife, two grandsons and I made a great circling train trip from Minneapolis to Chicago to Los Angeles to Portland to Glacier to Minneapolis a couple of years ago, with an intergenerational ElderHostel in the middle, and the whole crew seemed to be working pretty hard while remaining laudably cheerful. I suppose everybody understands that railroad construction crews work very hard but I don't think they understand that the hard work and danger apply to operating personnel, too. The cab of a steam locomotive which seems so romantic today was really a horrible and dangerous place to work. Walking a train, performing switch duties and just riding on the outside of a train were all awful work and dangerous to boot. Throw in separation from home and family and it starts to become a mystery that anyone would do such work. My Dad was away for five days at a time and could count on being doubled out the same day or the next day during the summers and holiday rush times. I can't remember a single Christmas when he was home and the only way we ever saw him in the summer was to move to Los Angeles from late May until early September so he could work a special W-Su train which ran from LA to the race track at Del Mar. There were some good parts of that: touring a lot of the west and missing some school at the beginnings and ends of each year.
-- D
Don,
It must have been tough on your mother, having your father away that much, and it must have been hard on you as a kid, too.
The trip you took with your wife and grandsons sounds like lots of fun. I know I've mentioned elsewhere on this forum that in the summer of '09 I went from Philadelphia to Washington to Chicago to Seattle to San Francisco to Chicago to Pittsburgh to Lancaster to Philadelphia, and it was quite an experience. I'd like to do it, or something similar, again some day. I like the idea of taking the train to Glacier Park.
Jeff
Taking the California Zephyr to Reno next Thursday.
Kevin
Jeff-
Yes, I think it was hard for both of my parents but they found a way to make it work. My Mother was fully in charge when Dad was gone. There was no wait-'til-your-father-gets-home stuff. If something needed doing, she did it. Then, when my Father returned, he took care of everything, including all of the cooking, the house and the yard. My Mother worked nearly full time in Chicago, which was pretty unconventional. All-in-all, they had a marriage which was much more like marriage today than it was like the 1950s version. I'm grateful for that.
And, yes, it was hard on my brother and me. I remember crying every time he left when I was a pre-schooler, and feeling elated when he came home.
Doneldon
yes, the railroad is and always will be a dangerous place to work. that's why there are so many rules in the rule book. that said, most crews aren't away for a week at a time. overnights at the away terminal are common, with a return trip the next day. most railroads are unionized, which helps some. there are provisions in the contracts that crews stuck at an away terminal with no trains back within a certain amount of time must be provided transportation to their home terminal. another provision which makes things safer is the requirement on norfolk southern that helper crews have two people. conrail tried single person helper crews, with alot more damage to equipment. ever try to hook up to the back of a train from the engine cab, by yourself? it ain't easy.........