Date   

locked Birmingham AL

Charles Harris
 

Hi
Just for interest sake is the main railroad on attached doc Southern Railway or all possibly L&N ?    Tallking 1940-50s.       I do not have any knowledge of this area.

Note that there was a siding or a transverse thru the Ingalls Iron Works factory in Birmingham AL.  Still there ??

Thanks
Charles


locked Ingalls 4-S Diesel Locomotive --- Construction

Charles Harris
 

Hi
This time my request is re the build did occur in Decatur of the Ingalls 4-S.   Some construction I believe was carried out in two locations, Decatur AL and Pascagoula MS.

At the Ingalls facilities in Decatur AL, could have been Iron Works or Shipbuilding divisions, a person by name of Mr. James Snow, worked on the project.  And do any Decatur-ians on this group have relatives or knowledge of the Snow family ??

Thanks

Charles Harris


locked Demonstration of Locomotive to Southern Railways

Charles Harris
 

Hi

Asked a similar question a year or two back, but just to refresh ---

Please  view the attached doc and the article in the Atlanta Constitution Newspaper re the Ingalls 4-S demonstration to several railroads.
To date I have not found any of the 'Proceedings of the Southern Southwestern Railway Club for 1946.  Can anyone help?

Also I would expect (if I am lucky) that in the Southern Railway archives there would be a 'report' and/or evaluation of the demonstration at Atlanta at that time. To Ike and everyone involved in logging all the archives info, keep and eye out for me.   I would join you but alas I live far away in New Zealand.

So basically any info that refers to the Ingalls 4-S is of interest.   February here in NZ already.

Thankyou
Charles Harris


locked Southern trackage rights on N&W Bristol to Lynchburg

George Eichelberger
 

Friday's trip to the SRHA archives located several interesting "new" (circa 1976) topics worth scanning, two files include trackage rights projects that were never finalized.

The attached two-page letter from Graham Claytor to John Fishwick, President of the N&W (with a CC to Robert Claytor, also at the N&W) is essentially a re-start of a long running conversation about granting the Southern trackage rights on the N&W between Bristol and Lynchburg, VA. Other correspondence mentions the fact that Mr. Fishwick was "not happy" with previous conversations the Southern had with N&W that he was not aware of. (WGC's brother?)

Ike


locked Re: Pinners Point steamer questions

Barry Kimble
 

Bill,

Thank you for the great reply.
I do remember now that you mention it, the photo in Ties and will look it up.
I also have a few prints by Mr Holtzinger.

Thanks, Barry 

On Jan 30, 2021, at 2:19 PM, Bill Schafer <bill4501@...> wrote:

Barry:

Casey Holtzinger, a prolific artist from the Hampton Roads area who passed away in 2009, painted hundreds of historic scenes of life in the area from long ago. Most of his work was in watercolors and adapted from black and white photos. Casey once told me that the hardest part of his work was in getting the color right (because the original images were monochrome). Accordingly, he put some research into each of his paintings by checking contemporary sources or asking old timers of their recollections. 

Casey painted a few rail-related scenes, although his work mostly focused on the maritime. One of his paintings depicted the Southern passenger terminal at Pinner’s Point, Va., where the overnight train from Danville had just arrived behind a green Ps-2 Pacific. The terminal was really a dock, with a track on one side and water on the other and a canopy in between. Opposite the Ps-2 was the steamer Memphis, which doubled as a tugboat and a passenger boat that shuttled passengers, mail, and express across the Elizabeth River to Southern’s downtown Norfolk terminal. Casey depicted the structure and hull of the Memphis in a uniform rust red with a black funnel. I understand tug Louisville and the various barges and lighters in Southern’s fleet were painted the same red. 

If you want to see the photo Casey based his painting on, see p. 14, 2013-2 TIES.

—Bill

On Jan 30, 2021, at 13:04, Barry Kimble <southernry@...> wrote:

Greetings,

Has anyone ever seen any color/painting documentation or drawings for the “Memphis” or “Louisville” tugs that worked Pinners Point ?
Any help is appreciated!

Thanks, Barry







locked Re: Pinners Point steamer questions

Bill Schafer
 

Barry:

Casey Holtzinger, a prolific artist from the Hampton Roads area who passed away in 2009, painted hundreds of historic scenes of life in the area from long ago. Most of his work was in watercolors and adapted from black and white photos. Casey once told me that the hardest part of his work was in getting the color right (because the original images were monochrome). Accordingly, he put some research into each of his paintings by checking contemporary sources or asking old timers of their recollections. 

Casey painted a few rail-related scenes, although his work mostly focused on the maritime. One of his paintings depicted the Southern passenger terminal at Pinner’s Point, Va., where the overnight train from Danville had just arrived behind a green Ps-2 Pacific. The terminal was really a dock, with a track on one side and water on the other and a canopy in between. Opposite the Ps-2 was the steamer Memphis, which doubled as a tugboat and a passenger boat that shuttled passengers, mail, and express across the Elizabeth River to Southern’s downtown Norfolk terminal. Casey depicted the structure and hull of the Memphis in a uniform rust red with a black funnel. I understand tug Louisville and the various barges and lighters in Southern’s fleet were painted the same red. 

If you want to see the photo Casey based his painting on, see p. 14, 2013-2 TIES.

—Bill

On Jan 30, 2021, at 13:04, Barry Kimble <southernry@...> wrote:

Greetings,

Has anyone ever seen any color/painting documentation or drawings for the “Memphis” or “Louisville” tugs that worked Pinners Point ?
Any help is appreciated!

Thanks, Barry







locked Pinners Point steamer questions

Barry Kimble
 

Greetings,

Has anyone ever seen any color/painting documentation or drawings for the “Memphis” or “Louisville” tugs that worked Pinners Point ?
Any help is appreciated!

Thanks, Barry


locked Re: Replacement boxcar doors

darrell2010
 

Scott,

Going through my images from your time frame:

SOU 525996 (painted with NS logo 5/91) YSD 6/6/2-panel modified door, 9/94 Bellingham, WA
SOU 527485 (painted with NS logo 12/88) YSD 6/6/2-panel modified door, 6/93 Fife, WA
SOU 530619 (painted 7/78 new) PS (2-panels)/2-panel modified door), 9/94 Bellingham, WA 
SOU 532061 (painted 4/80 new) PS (2-panels)/2-panel modified door), 9/94 Bellingham, WA

Not a very big sampling of cars with modified doors. During the same timeframe I shot another 11 Southern cars without modified doors. Still not a very big sampling, but might give a little guidance.

Darrell Sawyer


On Monday, January 25, 2021, 08:38:39 PM MST, D. Scott Chatfield <blindog@...> wrote:


While you can still find Southern-painted waffle boxcars on the rails (saw one yesterday), almost every last one has lost its original doors.  Does anyone recall when that started?  Building cars to use in the 1988-1994 timeframe and I'm not sure if any should have replacement doors yet.

Normally I'd look at my photos from back then to answer the question, but fact is Southern waffles and regular exterior-post boxcars were _so_ common that I didn't pay them much attention.  When film was relatively expensive, and you only had 24 or 36 shots on a roll, you couldn't just shoot every last car.  Today, with digital photography being like free beer, you can take as many as your bladder can hold.

More than once I cruised into North Platte, Nebraska, cleaned out every store of slide film (both stores), and still ran out of film by the end of the day.  Next stores with slide film were 70 miles east or 200 miles west.

Scott Chatfield


locked Re: Topic on Scales and Scale Tracks is locked, and I'd like to ask a question

Daniel Bourque
 

Bruce,

 

Here’s an excerpt that might help—it’s from Hugh and Ed Wolfe’s book “Appalachian Coal Hauler” describing how they used the light on the scale house at Andover Yard on the Interstate RR:

 

“Now, years ago when they weighed cars, they just used hand signals. Trains were short. Probably didn’t have over 10-15 cars to weigh. Fireman and engineer had to keep their head out the cab window all the time for signals. As trains got longer and longer, it got tougher and tougher to see those signals. Conductor had a pretty rough time getting’ the engineer to move. Somebody come up with the idea of puttin’ a light up by the scale house. It was an amber light on top of a long pole. Light just turned on and off. [The conductor on the yard crew] would sit inside the scale house at that bay window and operate that light with a foot switch. When the light came on, that meant for the engineer to give ‘em a start. He’d let his foot off the pedal, the light would go out and the engineer would stop. Now, if the cars got too far down on the scales, two short flashes meant to pull forward and one short flash meant to stop. The engine could be way up there on the main line at the upper end of Andover and the engineer could still see that light.”

 

I’m sure the two-light setup you describe worked a little differently than the single-light setup described here, but it’s probably pretty similar in its use.

 

While it’s all about coal, "Appalachian Coal Hauler” is an outstanding resource for not just those interested in the Interstate RR both pre- and post-Southern but for anyone wanting to understand from a first-hand perspective how train crews in the coal fields approached switching and overcame operational challenges. Absolutely fascinating!

 

Dan Bourque

 

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

 

From: bruce_l_harrison
Sent: Monday, January 25, 2021 5:37 PM
To: main@SouthernRailway.groups.io
Subject: Re: [SouthernRailway] Topic on Scales and Scale Tracks is locked, and I'd like to ask a question

 

Thank you for the replies. I’m modeling the scale house that once stood in the yard in Monroe Virginia. It must have been built using the same plans Ike posted (minus the interlocking).  I have several photos of the scale house (one from the archives) that show two lights mounted on short poles  As I mentioned in my note, I’m trying to understand how these lights that were used.  Ike’s drawing states they are  “street car head lights to be mounted on poles”.  Were they used to signal the engineer, or to illuminate the markings on the cars at night, or ???

 


locked Re: Replacement boxcar doors

Daniel Bourque
 

Scott,

 

I’ve found THE definitive photo for you--it shows waffle box 528541 in mid-metamorphosis with a half-original/half-replaced door in Jun 1998…

 

Ok, it’s not definitive, but it shows there were at least pieces of original doors still intact in 1998. The second image is a repainted Southern car (I think 528769) with a new door in Aug ’98. Both of these were shot on the BN in Cheyenne, WY—they weren’t that common up there, so I took pictures.

 

Hopefully these will help you narrow down the range.

 

Dan Bourque

 

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

 

From: D. Scott Chatfield
Sent: Monday, January 25, 2021 8:38 PM
To: main@SouthernRailway.groups.io
Subject: [SouthernRailway] Replacement boxcar doors

 

While you can still find Southern-painted waffle boxcars on the rails (saw one yesterday), almost every last one has lost its original doors.  Does anyone recall when that started?  Building cars to use in the 1988-1994 timeframe and I'm not sure if any should have replacement doors yet.

 

Normally I'd look at my photos from back then to answer the question, but fact is Southern waffles and regular exterior-post boxcars were _so_ common that I didn't pay them much attention.  When film was relatively expensive, and you only had 24 or 36 shots on a roll, you couldn't just shoot every last car.  Today, with digital photography being like free beer, you can take as many as your bladder can hold.

 

More than once I cruised into North Platte, Nebraska, cleaned out every store of slide film (both stores), and still ran out of film by the end of the day.  Next stores with slide film were 70 miles east or 200 miles west.

 

Scott Chatfield

 


locked Replacement boxcar doors

D. Scott Chatfield
 

While you can still find Southern-painted waffle boxcars on the rails (saw one yesterday), almost every last one has lost its original doors.  Does anyone recall when that started?  Building cars to use in the 1988-1994 timeframe and I'm not sure if any should have replacement doors yet.

Normally I'd look at my photos from back then to answer the question, but fact is Southern waffles and regular exterior-post boxcars were _so_ common that I didn't pay them much attention.  When film was relatively expensive, and you only had 24 or 36 shots on a roll, you couldn't just shoot every last car.  Today, with digital photography being like free beer, you can take as many as your bladder can hold.

More than once I cruised into North Platte, Nebraska, cleaned out every store of slide film (both stores), and still ran out of film by the end of the day.  Next stores with slide film were 70 miles east or 200 miles west.

Scott Chatfield


locked Re: Question on locomotive NON

George Eichelberger
 

The railroad would send orders to the agent at the interchange point to “intercept” in inbound shipment. The SD-35s were billed to Danville but they were intercepted and put into service at Louisville. I always thought the railroads offered “good” rates for moving others’ new locos and cars but $2,700 per unit is about average late 1960s price.

I’ve attached a scan of the EMD shipping notice for one of the SW-1500s. Notice was sent when every loco was picked up by the IHB. IHB-Monon-Southern was a typical route.

Ike



On Jan 25, 2021, at 5:01 PM, Bill Schafer <bill4501@...> wrote:

Ike:

You’re right that SOU required new equipment from offline sources to be billed to a station deep inside the Southern system so that SOU could participate in the rate. Lawyers, Va., near Lynchburg, was the usual location for company material or equipment being shipped through the Potomac Yard gateway, for instance. 

While Southern participated in the revenue of the move, the more important aspect was that the shipment moved on a through rate, which almost always resulted in the connecting road receiving less revenue than it otherwise would have if, say, Southern had billed new locomotives to Louisville on the foreign road and then handled them free as company material on system lines. The foreign road rate for the waybill retired in Louisville would have been higher than the foreign road's rate portion of an interline bill for a shipment billed to Danville.  

At least that’s how I remember the system working back in the day. 

—Bill

On Jan 25, 2021, at 13:43, George Eichelberger <geichelberger@...> wrote:

Kev:

Good info!

The diesel orders, or background data we have, discuss financing,  sometimes repair parts, etc. as part of the purchase logic. I have read references to “renting” equipment back and forth but very few examples of those costs or payments being exchanged. The ICC ledgers show debits and credits to the subsidiary level. I realize when the various companies were actually “merged”, the process was no longer necessary. (Although the lettering may have been required as long as it was under an Equipment Trust.)

A lot of strategy and thought went into new locomotive purchases. That fact that a specific unit could be declared as “new” or “replacement” effected its price and down to how much it cost to ship from from EMD or GE, etc. to get to Southern rails. (Enough used/remanufactured parts or a trade-in made for a replacement.)

(I think I’ve mentioned before that waybills for locos being delivered were normally billed to places other than actual interchange points (Danville, KY rather than Louisville) so the Southern could participate in the move’s revenue. The gateway and destination were also very important because of sales taxes. Fruit Growers had an advantage selling equipment to Southern because, as both were VA corporations, there was no sales tax on the purchase.)

Ike

PS Kevin Centers is one of SRHA’s Directors and an expert “bean counter” working with assets at NS. He is also active with equipment maintenance and restorations at the Oak Ridge museum.




On Jan 25, 2021, at 12:12 PM, Kevin Centers <klcenters@...> wrote:

Ike,

I know you’re aware of this, but some others may not be. One of the primary reasons for equipment being allocated across the different subs was related to tax benefits. Many times those benefits were related to what we would now consider like kind exchange transactions where whole assets, or components, would be traded in rather than sold for scrap, which allowed the road to avoid some taxation. It should be noted that the roads had to remain consistent across the transactions. In other words AGS for example could only contribute exchangeable components for an AGS order. 
In the 2010-2012 time frame I received a call from a group of Mechanical Department folks who wondered if it was still necessary to subletter locomotives and cars since this seemed like an easy area to realize some cost savings during painting. I explained that our asset records are identified by subsidiary and that sublettering equipment could come to an end since Accounting didn’t require assets in the field to be identified by sub. As far as I know that led to the end of that practice. 

Kevin

On Jan 25, 2021, at 11:49 AM, George Eichelberger <geichelberger@...> wrote:

In pre NS days, subsidiary lettering DID reflect ownership. The CNO&TP, etc. had their own equipment trusts, or the cash to buy rolling stock, separate from the Southern proper. Although most equipment was used throughout the SRS, they tried to equalize revenues and expenses.

Here is a snippet from the (eventual) SRHA Southern Railway diesel book that gives an ownership example with SW-7 orders:

Multiple  SW-7 orders to EMD in January and February, 1950 were the result of an August 30, 1949 memo to HA DeButts explaining that of the 523 diesels in operation and on order on the Southern Railway System, 439 (84%) were owned by the Southern Railway with the remaining 84 units (16%) owned by “Allied Lines”. That proportion did not provide enough power for the subsidiaries, so they had to rent power from the Southern. Power the Southern needed for its own operations and to complete the conversion from steam to diesel in road and yard services.

Specific recommendations included: twelve yard switchers for the NO&NE to release the same number of Southern units. For the AGS, five road and five yard switchers. The road switchers would be assigned to Chattanooga-Meridian locals, the yard units to the AGS 37th St. yard, releasing five company switchers. Eight units were proposed for the GS&F; four road switchers and four yard engines to release eight Southern road switcher units. The largest number of proposed units were to go to the CNO&TP; six road switchers to be assigned to Chattanooga-Cincinnati locals and fourteen yard switchers to be distributed: four to Citico Yard (releasing four Southern switchers), two to Oakdale Yard, one to Lexington and three to Danville, KY yards with the last four to Cincinnati’s Gest St. Yard.

The recommendation was for a total of fifty road and yard switchers. If accepted, twenty-eight Southern units would be released and the west end of the Birmingham and the St. Louis-Louisville Divisions would be completely dieselized. The other twenty-eight proposed units would completely dieselize yards at Birmingham, Chattanooga (Citico), Oakdale, Danville, KY, Lexington and Cincinnati.


Ike



On Jan 25, 2021, at 11:24 AM, Michael Shirey <pcrrhs6561@...> wrote:

Sam, it does help and thanks!

Michael Shirey
PCRRHS and SRHA Member


On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 8:30 AM Sam Smith via groups.io <sam_smith2004@...> wrote:
Micheal,
Yes, you are correct. If a locomotive, or any rolling stock does not have a subsidiary abbreviation displayed somewhere on it, then it belongs to the SOUTHERN proper. On freight cars and cabooses, these letters are usually on the upper right hand side.
Of course, all of this is primarily for financial and tax purposes, otherwise, it's all owned or operated by the Southern Railway Company.
Now, in "modern day" times, through paper mergers within mergers and such, you don't see these "sub-lettering" any more. 

Hope this helps a little.
Samuel Smith
Moultrie, Ga.


On Sun, Jan 24, 2021 at 8:41 PM, Michael Shirey
<pcrrhs6561@...> wrote:
Ok guys, I understand the check codes and reporting marks on the side of a locomotive cab. What if a locomotive does now have a reporting mark for ownership. Is it just assumed it belongs to SOU? I ask this because there seems to be a few GP38-2 with no marks. I have Athearn #40609 SOU 5025 GP38-2. 

Michael Shirey
PCRRHS and SRHA Member




















locked Re: Topic on Scales and Scale Tracks is locked, and I'd like to ask a question

bruce_l_harrison
 

Thank you for the replies. I’m modeling the scale house that once stood in the yard in Monroe Virginia. It must have been built using the same plans Ike posted (minus the interlocking).  I have several photos of the scale house (one from the archives) that show two lights mounted on short poles  As I mentioned in my note, I’m trying to understand how these lights that were used.  Ike’s drawing states they are  street car head lights to be mounted on poles”.  Were they used to signal the engineer, or to illuminate the markings on the cars at night, or ???


locked Re: Topic on Scales and Scale Tracks is locked, and I'd like to ask a question

michael lowe
 

    Between 1980 and 1988, I weighed some cars on a small scale in an enclosed shack on the MKT in Dallas, Texas. The first car would be shoved acorss the locked track, then uncoupled.
I would unlock the scale and weigh the car. I waited for the scale to quit bouncing and the switch crew would get frustrated with me, but I wanted an accurate weight.  Then I would lock the
scale and the crew would shove the next car, etc.  Sometimes, I had a car, that I had to weigh each half of the car, because it was too long. I was a certified  WWIB weighmaster.
   The scale had a slot to put the scale ticket in and clamp it down, so it embossed the weight.    
    Michael Lowe.


locked Re: Question on locomotive NON

Bill Schafer
 

Ike:

You’re right that SOU required new equipment from offline sources to be billed to a station deep inside the Southern system so that SOU could participate in the rate. Lawyers, Va., near Lynchburg, was the usual location for company material or equipment being shipped through the Potomac Yard gateway, for instance. 

While Southern participated in the revenue of the move, the more important aspect was that the shipment moved on a through rate, which almost always resulted in the connecting road receiving less revenue than it otherwise would have if, say, Southern had billed new locomotives to Louisville on the foreign road and then handled them free as company material on system lines. The foreign road rate for the waybill retired in Louisville would have been higher than the foreign road's rate portion of an interline bill for a shipment billed to Danville.  

At least that’s how I remember the system working back in the day. 

—Bill

On Jan 25, 2021, at 13:43, George Eichelberger <geichelberger@...> wrote:

Kev:

Good info!

The diesel orders, or background data we have, discuss financing,  sometimes repair parts, etc. as part of the purchase logic. I have read references to “renting” equipment back and forth but very few examples of those costs or payments being exchanged. The ICC ledgers show debits and credits to the subsidiary level. I realize when the various companies were actually “merged”, the process was no longer necessary. (Although the lettering may have been required as long as it was under an Equipment Trust.)

A lot of strategy and thought went into new locomotive purchases. That fact that a specific unit could be declared as “new” or “replacement” effected its price and down to how much it cost to ship from from EMD or GE, etc. to get to Southern rails. (Enough used/remanufactured parts or a trade-in made for a replacement.)

(I think I’ve mentioned before that waybills for locos being delivered were normally billed to places other than actual interchange points (Danville, KY rather than Louisville) so the Southern could participate in the move’s revenue. The gateway and destination were also very important because of sales taxes. Fruit Growers had an advantage selling equipment to Southern because, as both were VA corporations, there was no sales tax on the purchase.)

Ike

PS Kevin Centers is one of SRHA’s Directors and an expert “bean counter” working with assets at NS. He is also active with equipment maintenance and restorations at the Oak Ridge museum.




On Jan 25, 2021, at 12:12 PM, Kevin Centers <klcenters@...> wrote:

Ike,

I know you’re aware of this, but some others may not be. One of the primary reasons for equipment being allocated across the different subs was related to tax benefits. Many times those benefits were related to what we would now consider like kind exchange transactions where whole assets, or components, would be traded in rather than sold for scrap, which allowed the road to avoid some taxation. It should be noted that the roads had to remain consistent across the transactions. In other words AGS for example could only contribute exchangeable components for an AGS order. 
In the 2010-2012 time frame I received a call from a group of Mechanical Department folks who wondered if it was still necessary to subletter locomotives and cars since this seemed like an easy area to realize some cost savings during painting. I explained that our asset records are identified by subsidiary and that sublettering equipment could come to an end since Accounting didn’t require assets in the field to be identified by sub. As far as I know that led to the end of that practice. 

Kevin

On Jan 25, 2021, at 11:49 AM, George Eichelberger <geichelberger@...> wrote:

In pre NS days, subsidiary lettering DID reflect ownership. The CNO&TP, etc. had their own equipment trusts, or the cash to buy rolling stock, separate from the Southern proper. Although most equipment was used throughout the SRS, they tried to equalize revenues and expenses.

Here is a snippet from the (eventual) SRHA Southern Railway diesel book that gives an ownership example with SW-7 orders:

Multiple  SW-7 orders to EMD in January and February, 1950 were the result of an August 30, 1949 memo to HA DeButts explaining that of the 523 diesels in operation and on order on the Southern Railway System, 439 (84%) were owned by the Southern Railway with the remaining 84 units (16%) owned by “Allied Lines”. That proportion did not provide enough power for the subsidiaries, so they had to rent power from the Southern. Power the Southern needed for its own operations and to complete the conversion from steam to diesel in road and yard services.

Specific recommendations included: twelve yard switchers for the NO&NE to release the same number of Southern units. For the AGS, five road and five yard switchers. The road switchers would be assigned to Chattanooga-Meridian locals, the yard units to the AGS 37th St. yard, releasing five company switchers. Eight units were proposed for the GS&F; four road switchers and four yard engines to release eight Southern road switcher units. The largest number of proposed units were to go to the CNO&TP; six road switchers to be assigned to Chattanooga-Cincinnati locals and fourteen yard switchers to be distributed: four to Citico Yard (releasing four Southern switchers), two to Oakdale Yard, one to Lexington and three to Danville, KY yards with the last four to Cincinnati’s Gest St. Yard.

The recommendation was for a total of fifty road and yard switchers. If accepted, twenty-eight Southern units would be released and the west end of the Birmingham and the St. Louis-Louisville Divisions would be completely dieselized. The other twenty-eight proposed units would completely dieselize yards at Birmingham, Chattanooga (Citico), Oakdale, Danville, KY, Lexington and Cincinnati.


Ike



On Jan 25, 2021, at 11:24 AM, Michael Shirey <pcrrhs6561@...> wrote:

Sam, it does help and thanks!

Michael Shirey
PCRRHS and SRHA Member


On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 8:30 AM Sam Smith via groups.io <sam_smith2004@...> wrote:
Micheal,
Yes, you are correct. If a locomotive, or any rolling stock does not have a subsidiary abbreviation displayed somewhere on it, then it belongs to the SOUTHERN proper. On freight cars and cabooses, these letters are usually on the upper right hand side.
Of course, all of this is primarily for financial and tax purposes, otherwise, it's all owned or operated by the Southern Railway Company.
Now, in "modern day" times, through paper mergers within mergers and such, you don't see these "sub-lettering" any more. 

Hope this helps a little.
Samuel Smith
Moultrie, Ga.


On Sun, Jan 24, 2021 at 8:41 PM, Michael Shirey
<pcrrhs6561@...> wrote:
Ok guys, I understand the check codes and reporting marks on the side of a locomotive cab. What if a locomotive does now have a reporting mark for ownership. Is it just assumed it belongs to SOU? I ask this because there seems to be a few GP38-2 with no marks. I have Athearn #40609 SOU 5025 GP38-2. 

Michael Shirey
PCRRHS and SRHA Member



















locked Re: Question on locomotive NON markings

George Eichelberger
 

Kev:

Good info!

The diesel orders, or background data we have, discuss financing, sometimes repair parts, etc. as part of the purchase logic. I have read references to “renting” equipment back and forth but very few examples of those costs or payments being exchanged. The ICC ledgers show debits and credits to the subsidiary level. I realize when the various companies were actually “merged”, the process was no longer necessary. (Although the lettering may have been required as long as it was under an Equipment Trust.)

A lot of strategy and thought went into new locomotive purchases. That fact that a specific unit could be declared as “new” or “replacement” effected its price and down to how much it cost to ship from from EMD or GE, etc. to get to Southern rails. (Enough used/remanufactured parts or a trade-in made for a replacement.)

(I think I’ve mentioned before that waybills for locos being delivered were normally billed to places other than actual interchange points (Danville, KY rather than Louisville) so the Southern could participate in the move’s revenue. The gateway and destination were also very important because of sales taxes. Fruit Growers had an advantage selling equipment to Southern because, as both were VA corporations, there was no sales tax on the purchase.)

Ike

PS Kevin Centers is one of SRHA’s Directors and an expert “bean counter” working with assets at NS. He is also active with equipment maintenance and restorations at the Oak Ridge museum.

On Jan 25, 2021, at 12:12 PM, Kevin Centers <klcenters@...> wrote:

Ike,

I know you’re aware of this, but some others may not be. One of the primary reasons for equipment being allocated across the different subs was related to tax benefits. Many times those benefits were related to what we would now consider like kind exchange transactions where whole assets, or components, would be traded in rather than sold for scrap, which allowed the road to avoid some taxation. It should be noted that the roads had to remain consistent across the transactions. In other words AGS for example could only contribute exchangeable components for an AGS order.
In the 2010-2012 time frame I received a call from a group of Mechanical Department folks who wondered if it was still necessary to subletter locomotives and cars since this seemed like an easy area to realize some cost savings during painting. I explained that our asset records are identified by subsidiary and that sublettering equipment could come to an end since Accounting didn’t require assets in the field to be identified by sub. As far as I know that led to the end of that practice.

Kevin

On Jan 25, 2021, at 11:49 AM, George Eichelberger <geichelberger@...> wrote:

In pre NS days, subsidiary lettering DID reflect ownership. The CNO&TP, etc. had their own equipment trusts, or the cash to buy rolling stock, separate from the Southern proper. Although most equipment was used throughout the SRS, they tried to equalize revenues and expenses.

Here is a snippet from the (eventual) SRHA Southern Railway diesel book that gives an ownership example with SW-7 orders:

Multiple SW-7 orders to EMD in January and February, 1950 were the result of an August 30, 1949 memo to HA DeButts explaining that of the 523 diesels in operation and on order on the Southern Railway System, 439 (84%) were owned by the Southern Railway with the remaining 84 units (16%) owned by “Allied Lines”. That proportion did not provide enough power for the subsidiaries, so they had to rent power from the Southern. Power the Southern needed for its own operations and to complete the conversion from steam to diesel in road and yard services.

Specific recommendations included: twelve yard switchers for the NO&NE to release the same number of Southern units. For the AGS, five road and five yard switchers. The road switchers would be assigned to Chattanooga-Meridian locals, the yard units to the AGS 37th St. yard, releasing five company switchers. Eight units were proposed for the GS&F; four road switchers and four yard engines to release eight Southern road switcher units. The largest number of proposed units were to go to the CNO&TP; six road switchers to be assigned to Chattanooga-Cincinnati locals and fourteen yard switchers to be distributed: four to Citico Yard (releasing four Southern switchers), two to Oakdale Yard, one to Lexington and three to Danville, KY yards with the last four to Cincinnati’s Gest St. Yard.

The recommendation was for a total of fifty road and yard switchers. If accepted, twenty-eight Southern units would be released and the west end of the Birmingham and the St. Louis-Louisville Divisions would be completely dieselized. The other twenty-eight proposed units would completely dieselize yards at Birmingham, Chattanooga (Citico), Oakdale, Danville, KY, Lexington and Cincinnati.


Ike



On Jan 25, 2021, at 11:24 AM, Michael Shirey <pcrrhs6561@...> wrote:

Sam, it does help and thanks!

Michael Shirey
PCRRHS and SRHA Member


On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 8:30 AM Sam Smith via groups.io <sam_smith2004@...> wrote:
Micheal,
Yes, you are correct. If a locomotive, or any rolling stock does not have a subsidiary abbreviation displayed somewhere on it, then it belongs to the SOUTHERN proper. On freight cars and cabooses, these letters are usually on the upper right hand side.
Of course, all of this is primarily for financial and tax purposes, otherwise, it's all owned or operated by the Southern Railway Company.
Now, in "modern day" times, through paper mergers within mergers and such, you don't see these "sub-lettering" any more.

Hope this helps a little.
Samuel Smith
Moultrie, Ga.


On Sun, Jan 24, 2021 at 8:41 PM, Michael Shirey
<pcrrhs6561@...> wrote:
Ok guys, I understand the check codes and reporting marks on the side of a locomotive cab. What if a locomotive does now have a reporting mark for ownership. Is it just assumed it belongs to SOU? I ask this because there seems to be a few GP38-2 with no marks. I have Athearn #40609 SOU 5025 GP38-2.

Michael Shirey
PCRRHS and SRHA Member









locked Re: Question on locomotive NON markings

Kevin Centers
 

Ike,

I know you’re aware of this, but some others may not be. One of the primary reasons for equipment being allocated across the different subs was related to tax benefits. Many times those benefits were related to what we would now consider like kind exchange transactions where whole assets, or components, would be traded in rather than sold for scrap, which allowed the road to avoid some taxation. It should be noted that the roads had to remain consistent across the transactions. In other words AGS for example could only contribute exchangeable components for an AGS order.
In the 2010-2012 time frame I received a call from a group of Mechanical Department folks who wondered if it was still necessary to subletter locomotives and cars since this seemed like an easy area to realize some cost savings during painting. I explained that our asset records are identified by subsidiary and that sublettering equipment could come to an end since Accounting didn’t require assets in the field to be identified by sub. As far as I know that led to the end of that practice.

Kevin

On Jan 25, 2021, at 11:49 AM, George Eichelberger <geichelberger@...> wrote:

In pre NS days, subsidiary lettering DID reflect ownership. The CNO&TP, etc. had their own equipment trusts, or the cash to buy rolling stock, separate from the Southern proper. Although most equipment was used throughout the SRS, they tried to equalize revenues and expenses.

Here is a snippet from the (eventual) SRHA Southern Railway diesel book that gives an ownership example with SW-7 orders:

Multiple SW-7 orders to EMD in January and February, 1950 were the result of an August 30, 1949 memo to HA DeButts explaining that of the 523 diesels in operation and on order on the Southern Railway System, 439 (84%) were owned by the Southern Railway with the remaining 84 units (16%) owned by “Allied Lines”. That proportion did not provide enough power for the subsidiaries, so they had to rent power from the Southern. Power the Southern needed for its own operations and to complete the conversion from steam to diesel in road and yard services.

Specific recommendations included: twelve yard switchers for the NO&NE to release the same number of Southern units. For the AGS, five road and five yard switchers. The road switchers would be assigned to Chattanooga-Meridian locals, the yard units to the AGS 37th St. yard, releasing five company switchers. Eight units were proposed for the GS&F; four road switchers and four yard engines to release eight Southern road switcher units. The largest number of proposed units were to go to the CNO&TP; six road switchers to be assigned to Chattanooga-Cincinnati locals and fourteen yard switchers to be distributed: four to Citico Yard (releasing four Southern switchers), two to Oakdale Yard, one to Lexington and three to Danville, KY yards with the last four to Cincinnati’s Gest St. Yard.

The recommendation was for a total of fifty road and yard switchers. If accepted, twenty-eight Southern units would be released and the west end of the Birmingham and the St. Louis-Louisville Divisions would be completely dieselized. The other twenty-eight proposed units would completely dieselize yards at Birmingham, Chattanooga (Citico), Oakdale, Danville, KY, Lexington and Cincinnati.


Ike



On Jan 25, 2021, at 11:24 AM, Michael Shirey <pcrrhs6561@...> wrote:

Sam, it does help and thanks!

Michael Shirey
PCRRHS and SRHA Member


On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 8:30 AM Sam Smith via groups.io <sam_smith2004@...> wrote:
Micheal,
Yes, you are correct. If a locomotive, or any rolling stock does not have a subsidiary abbreviation displayed somewhere on it, then it belongs to the SOUTHERN proper. On freight cars and cabooses, these letters are usually on the upper right hand side.
Of course, all of this is primarily for financial and tax purposes, otherwise, it's all owned or operated by the Southern Railway Company.
Now, in "modern day" times, through paper mergers within mergers and such, you don't see these "sub-lettering" any more.

Hope this helps a little.
Samuel Smith
Moultrie, Ga.


On Sun, Jan 24, 2021 at 8:41 PM, Michael Shirey
<pcrrhs6561@...> wrote:
Ok guys, I understand the check codes and reporting marks on the side of a locomotive cab. What if a locomotive does now have a reporting mark for ownership. Is it just assumed it belongs to SOU? I ask this because there seems to be a few GP38-2 with no marks. I have Athearn #40609 SOU 5025 GP38-2.

Michael Shirey
PCRRHS and SRHA Member









locked Re: Question on locomotive NON markings

George Eichelberger
 

In pre NS days, subsidiary lettering DID reflect ownership. The CNO&TP, etc. had their own equipment trusts, or the cash to buy rolling stock, separate from the Southern proper. Although most equipment was used throughout the SRS, they tried to equalize revenues and expenses.

Here is a snippet from the (eventual) SRHA Southern Railway diesel book that gives an ownership example with SW-7 orders:

Multiple SW-7 orders to EMD in January and February, 1950 were the result of an August 30, 1949 memo to HA DeButts explaining that of the 523 diesels in operation and on order on the Southern Railway System, 439 (84%) were owned by the Southern Railway with the remaining 84 units (16%) owned by “Allied Lines”. That proportion did not provide enough power for the subsidiaries, so they had to rent power from the Southern. Power the Southern needed for its own operations and to complete the conversion from steam to diesel in road and yard services.

Specific recommendations included: twelve yard switchers for the NO&NE to release the same number of Southern units. For the AGS, five road and five yard switchers. The road switchers would be assigned to Chattanooga-Meridian locals, the yard units to the AGS 37th St. yard, releasing five company switchers. Eight units were proposed for the GS&F; four road switchers and four yard engines to release eight Southern road switcher units. The largest number of proposed units were to go to the CNO&TP; six road switchers to be assigned to Chattanooga-Cincinnati locals and fourteen yard switchers to be distributed: four to Citico Yard (releasing four Southern switchers), two to Oakdale Yard, one to Lexington and three to Danville, KY yards with the last four to Cincinnati’s Gest St. Yard.

The recommendation was for a total of fifty road and yard switchers. If accepted, twenty-eight Southern units would be released and the west end of the Birmingham and the St. Louis-Louisville Divisions would be completely dieselized. The other twenty-eight proposed units would completely dieselize yards at Birmingham, Chattanooga (Citico), Oakdale, Danville, KY, Lexington and Cincinnati.


Ike

On Jan 25, 2021, at 11:24 AM, Michael Shirey <pcrrhs6561@...> wrote:

Sam, it does help and thanks!

Michael Shirey
PCRRHS and SRHA Member


On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 8:30 AM Sam Smith via groups.io <sam_smith2004@...> wrote:
Micheal,
Yes, you are correct. If a locomotive, or any rolling stock does not have a subsidiary abbreviation displayed somewhere on it, then it belongs to the SOUTHERN proper. On freight cars and cabooses, these letters are usually on the upper right hand side.
Of course, all of this is primarily for financial and tax purposes, otherwise, it's all owned or operated by the Southern Railway Company.
Now, in "modern day" times, through paper mergers within mergers and such, you don't see these "sub-lettering" any more.

Hope this helps a little.
Samuel Smith
Moultrie, Ga.


On Sun, Jan 24, 2021 at 8:41 PM, Michael Shirey
<pcrrhs6561@...> wrote:
Ok guys, I understand the check codes and reporting marks on the side of a locomotive cab. What if a locomotive does now have a reporting mark for ownership. Is it just assumed it belongs to SOU? I ask this because there seems to be a few GP38-2 with no marks. I have Athearn #40609 SOU 5025 GP38-2.

Michael Shirey
PCRRHS and SRHA Member


locked Re: Question on locomotive NON markings

Michael Shirey
 

 Sam, it does help and thanks!

Michael Shirey
PCRRHS and SRHA Member


On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 8:30 AM Sam Smith via groups.io <sam_smith2004=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:
Micheal,
Yes, you are correct. If a locomotive, or any rolling stock does not have a subsidiary abbreviation displayed somewhere on it, then it belongs to the SOUTHERN proper. On freight cars and cabooses, these letters are usually on the upper right hand side.
Of course, all of this is primarily for financial and tax purposes, otherwise, it's all owned or operated by the Southern Railway Company.
Now, in "modern day" times, through paper mergers within mergers and such, you don't see these "sub-lettering" any more. 

Hope this helps a little.
Samuel Smith
Moultrie, Ga.


On Sun, Jan 24, 2021 at 8:41 PM, Michael Shirey
 Ok guys, I understand the check codes and reporting marks on the side of a locomotive cab. What if a locomotive does now have a reporting mark for ownership. Is it just assumed it belongs to SOU? I ask this because there seems to be a few GP38-2 with no marks. I have Athearn #40609 SOU 5025 GP38-2. 

Michael Shirey
PCRRHS and SRHA Member


locked Re: HO BLI/QSI Steam Locomotives

michael DUNNINGTON
 

No original box. Sorry. 
Michael 


On Jan 25, 2021, at 6:36 AM, rwbrv4 via groups.io <dccinstallssales@...> wrote:


If it was in the original box please send me a photo of the box end with all it's information.
Rick


-----Original Message-----
From: cvlwrnut@...
To: main@SouthernRailway.groups.io
Sent: Sun, Jan 24, 2021 4:21 pm
Subject: [SouthernRailway] HO BLI/QSI Steam Locomotives

Has anyone in the group had any experience with "older" Broadway Limited steam locomotives?  I acquired one (decorated as a SOU 2-8-2 #6326) recently at an estate sale.  I operate only DC, but they're supposed to run on DC.  Anyway, when I powered it up, it made start-up sounds, but would not run.  Having contacted BLI, I was told that it's a discontinued, QSI-sound-equipped model, older than fifteen years.  I managed to do a reset on the locomotive, but it still won't run.  I'm suspecting that there's a motor/gearing problem, since it makes a vague rumbling sound when it should be running.
In any case, it didn't come with any parts/service drawings, and they're no longer available from Broadway Limited.  I'm hoping that someone in this group might have experience with one like mine, or similar in age.
Thanks for any help you might offer.
Michael Dunnington
St. Louis, MO, area

961 - 980 of 2491