Date   

locked Re: F-Unit Roof Hatches

Warren Calloway
 

On Dec 1, 2019, at 10:02 PM, Warren Calloway <wcalloway@nc.rr.com> wrote:

<SOU4260BOX.jpg>

On Dec 1, 2019, at 7:04 PM, Jason Greene <jason.p.greene@gmail.com> wrote:

Funny that Warren poised the same question in 1970, and the answer we get comes from a book he wrote.

There is some good stuff on that page from x2200.

Jason Greene

On Dec 1, 2019, at 1:03 PM, C J Wyatt <cjwyatt@bellsouth.net> wrote:


An attempt to improve engine room ventilation. Answer is on P.338 of Diesels of the Southern Railway 1939-1982 (Withers with Calloway and Wilson).

Jack Wyatt

On Sunday, December 1, 2019, 12:35:15 PM EST, Bill Schafer <bill4501@mindspring.com> wrote:


I'm not a locomotive expert by any means, and one of our colleagues from White River Productions, Dale Sanders, has posed a question I hope someone in the group can answer. Dale says:

I'm in the process of completing a two-volume pair of books covering Northern Pacific's diesel fleet. While gathering photographs for the project, I've come across a photo for which I have no explanation. The NP modified one of their freight service F7Bs with a unique roof hatch extension. See attached photo (the roof hatch extension in question is at the far right). None of my living NP experts have an explanation for this modification.


Then, I came across the attached page from the April/May 1970 issue of X2200 South.


There is the same [or similar] roof hatch extension on a Southern F-unit, again with no explanation. I'm hoping you may be able to answer the question that has been haunting me for some time now. Why did the Southern (and the NP) make this modification?

Any insights will be welcome - I'll pass them on to Dale.

Thanks.

--Bill Schafer


locked Re: F-Unit Roof Hatches

Warren Calloway
 

On Dec 1, 2019, at 7:04 PM, Jason Greene <jason.p.greene@gmail.com> wrote:

Funny that Warren poised the same question in 1970, and the answer we get comes from a book he wrote.

There is some good stuff on that page from x2200.

Jason Greene

On Dec 1, 2019, at 1:03 PM, C J Wyatt <cjwyatt@bellsouth.net> wrote:


An attempt to improve engine room ventilation. Answer is on P.338 of Diesels of the Southern Railway 1939-1982 (Withers with Calloway and Wilson).

Jack Wyatt

On Sunday, December 1, 2019, 12:35:15 PM EST, Bill Schafer <bill4501@mindspring.com> wrote:


I'm not a locomotive expert by any means, and one of our colleagues from White River Productions, Dale Sanders, has posed a question I hope someone in the group can answer. Dale says:

I'm in the process of completing a two-volume pair of books covering Northern Pacific's diesel fleet. While gathering photographs for the project, I've come across a photo for which I have no explanation. The NP modified one of their freight service F7Bs with a unique roof hatch extension. See attached photo (the roof hatch extension in question is at the far right). None of my living NP experts have an explanation for this modification.


Then, I came across the attached page from the April/May 1970 issue of X2200 South.


There is the same [or similar] roof hatch extension on a Southern F-unit, again with no explanation. I'm hoping you may be able to answer the question that has been haunting me for some time now. Why did the Southern (and the NP) make this modification?

Any insights will be welcome - I'll pass them on to Dale.

Thanks.

--Bill Schafer


locked Re: F-Unit Roof Hatches

Warren Calloway
 

On Dec 1, 2019, at 9:43 PM, Warren Calloway <wcalloway@nc.rr.com> wrote:

<SOU4260BOX.JPG><SOU4260GRNSBRO12DEC71-1024.jpg>


PHOTOS OF BOX IN QUESTION!

WARREN


On Dec 1, 2019, at 9:01 PM, George Eichelberger <geichelberger@bellsouth.net> wrote:

There is quite a few inter-railroad letters in the SRHA archives but I don’t recall anything between the Southern and the Northern Pacific. The Southern was constantly experimenting and proposing design changes to EMD. EMD may have passed an idea along to, or from, the NP.

I am certainly not saying any published material is wrong, esp if written by Warren Calloway, Tom Sink or Paul Withers. Unfortunately, we see a lot of "conventional wisdom" that may not be absolutely correct, I’d like to see more documentation or specifics on some topics.

My main reason for questioning the use of our mysterious hatch for ventilation is because of documentation by EMD. “Product Development” sheets for F-7s and E-8s (attached) discuss “pressurized ventilation” and “into the engine room under pressure”. (Both pages were issued January, 1949.) If those designs were faulty, I would expect us to see modifications of some sort on multiple locomotives?

The answer here may simply be “as far as is known…..” I suggest we can accept that where an absolute answer cannot be found when we realize how much material (answers) has been preserved in archives donations from NS and the Marvin Black collection.

Ike

<EMD E-8 Product Development bulletin.jpeg>

<EMD F-7 Product Development bulletin.jpeg>


locked Re: F-Unit Roof Hatches

Warren Calloway
 

PHOTOS OF BOX IN QUESTION!

WARREN

On Dec 1, 2019, at 9:01 PM, George Eichelberger <geichelberger@bellsouth.net> wrote:

There is quite a few inter-railroad letters in the SRHA archives but I don’t recall anything between the Southern and the Northern Pacific. The Southern was constantly experimenting and proposing design changes to EMD. EMD may have passed an idea along to, or from, the NP.

I am certainly not saying any published material is wrong, esp if written by Warren Calloway, Tom Sink or Paul Withers. Unfortunately, we see a lot of "conventional wisdom" that may not be absolutely correct, I’d like to see more documentation or specifics on some topics.

My main reason for questioning the use of our mysterious hatch for ventilation is because of documentation by EMD. “Product Development” sheets for F-7s and E-8s (attached) discuss “pressurized ventilation” and “into the engine room under pressure”. (Both pages were issued January, 1949.) If those designs were faulty, I would expect us to see modifications of some sort on multiple locomotives?

The answer here may simply be “as far as is known…..” I suggest we can accept that where an absolute answer cannot be found when we realize how much material (answers) has been preserved in archives donations from NS and the Marvin Black collection.

Ike

<EMD E-8 Product Development bulletin.jpeg>

<EMD F-7 Product Development bulletin.jpeg>


locked Re: F-Unit Roof Hatches

George Eichelberger
 

There is quite a few inter-railroad letters in the SRHA archives but I don’t recall anything between the Southern and the Northern Pacific. The Southern was constantly experimenting and proposing design changes to EMD. EMD may have passed an idea along to, or from, the NP.

I am certainly not saying any published material is wrong, esp if written by Warren Calloway, Tom Sink or Paul Withers. Unfortunately, we see a lot of "conventional wisdom" that may not be absolutely correct, I’d like to see more documentation or specifics on some topics.

My main reason for questioning the use of our mysterious hatch for ventilation is because of documentation by EMD. “Product Development” sheets for F-7s and E-8s (attached) discuss “pressurized ventilation” and “into the engine room under pressure”. (Both pages were issued January, 1949.) If those designs were faulty, I would expect us to see modifications of some sort on multiple locomotives?

The answer here may simply be “as far as is known…..” I suggest we can accept that where an absolute answer cannot be found when we realize how much material (answers) has been preserved in archives donations from NS and the Marvin Black collection.

Ike



locked Re: F-Unit Roof Hatches

Jason Greene
 

Funny that Warren poised the same question in 1970, and the answer we get comes from a book he wrote. 

There is some good stuff on that page from x2200. 

Jason Greene 

On Dec 1, 2019, at 1:03 PM, C J Wyatt <cjwyatt@...> wrote:


An attempt to improve engine room ventilation. Answer is on P.338 of Diesels of the Southern Railway 1939-1982 (Withers with Calloway and Wilson).

Jack Wyatt

On Sunday, December 1, 2019, 12:35:15 PM EST, Bill Schafer <bill4501@...> wrote:


I'm not a locomotive expert by any means, and one of our colleagues from White River Productions, Dale Sanders, has posed a question I hope someone in the group can answer. Dale says:

I'm in the process of completing a two-volume pair of books covering Northern Pacific's diesel fleet. While gathering photographs for the project, I've come across a photo for which I have no explanation. The NP modified one of their freight service F7Bs with a unique roof hatch extension. See attached photo (the roof hatch extension in question is at the far right). None of my living NP experts have an explanation for this modification.


Then, I came across the attached page from the April/May 1970 issue of X2200 South.


 There is the same [or similar] roof hatch extension on a Southern F-unit, again with no explanation. I'm hoping you may be able to answer the question that has been haunting me for some time now. Why did the Southern (and the NP) make this modification? 

Any insights will be welcome - I'll pass them on to Dale. 

Thanks.

--Bill Schafer


locked Re: F-Unit Roof Hatches

Robert Graham
 

My oldest Sou Ry form 1014 is from 1966 (I think, undated, but newest power listed are the 1965 SD35's and the 2800 & 2900 series E6A's are still listed) and a May 6 1970 SOU form 1014 both list SOU F7A 4260 as weighing 243,520 lbs, nowhere near the heaviest among the 1951-built F7A listed; several were shown as over 244,000 lbs, so Mr. Chatfield's theory of excess weight added is disproved. SOU 4260 was listed as one of the 65/12 lower gear ratio "mountain engines" in the 1966 form 1014, but re-geared to 62/15 in the 1973 form 1014. This is the only difference shown in this source for SOU 4260. 

Marvin Black related to me in the early 1970's when this box was observed on SOU 4260 that it was an attempt to reduce ambient heat that built up in the engine room during extended maximum prime mover operation. The box served as a plenum and was vented under the top lip; engine heat would rise into the chamber and motion of the locomotive would draw the heat out as it moved. It was a trial installed, photo evidence indicates, in the early 1960's. There is a May 1963 photo of 4260 leading a train with the roof modification already installed. An interesting additional observation is that all 4 36" radiator fans on this then only 12 year old 1951 built F7 were also replaced with high shroud fans, as found on early F3's. The 1971 photo of the 4260 show 2 of them still installed. I found that fan installation to be curious. Yes, I am aware that EMD 36" rooftop radiator fans are interchangeable, but to have all 4 fail and be replaced with an older version is an interesting additional anomaly. I wonder if the thinking was in some way related to the fix that was made to SOU GP7's that crews complained of inadequate cab heaters that was fixed with the large shroud applied to the radiator fan closest to the cab. Two different problems, but the approach makes me wonder whether it was coincidence or part of the trial. I have no written documentation from Marvin to confirm or deny this statement. Perhaps it is contained within Marvin's writings that the SRHA obtained from his estate.

I also was contacted by Mr. Sanders, and passed this information on to him, for what it was worth, telling him I did not have any specific reason or purpose for that modification on SOU 4260.

As far as DotSR by Withers, et.al., is concerned, the tome certainly has its errors, but I think readers and users are better served by specific and documented corrections, rather than broad brush disparagement of its accuracy. All publications are "frozen in time" after publication and flawed by the limits to updating information with better facts as they are uncovered after publication. Esteemed SOU diesel authority Marvin Black was a significant historical background and detail contributor to that volume, and his research credentials are as good as it gets. Mr. Eichelberger and those working with the SRHA archives would echo that.

One final thought: was there any collaboration with the NP on this project, either before or after? Was it suggested by an employee of SOU or NP, or a vendor, or the product of one of those RR Supplier conferences?  It will be interesting to see what the SRHA archives might hold on this subject.


Bob Graham  

-----------------------------------------

From: "D. Scott Chatfield"
To: main@SouthernRailway.groups.io
Cc:
Sent: Sunday December 1 2019 2:12:32PM
Subject: Re: [SouthernRailway] F-Unit Roof Hatches

I gave it a little more thought and I wonder if these were former roof-hung water tanks filled with concrete to add weight.  I don't have an old Locomotive Summary book (my oldest is from 1975, and she was retired in 1973) so I can't look up 4260's weight.  But if that box is full of concrete it should add about 10 to 11,000 pounds to the engine, assuming it extends down into the carbody about a foot.  Any deeper and it would interfere with the doorway.

A normal F-unit weighed between 230,000 and 240,000 pounds.  Was 4260 heavier?


Scott Chatfield


locked Re: F-Unit Roof Hatches

George Eichelberger
 

I have to agree with Scott’s “doesn’t make it correct” comment. “Improving engine room ventilation" does not make sense to me. If the “thing” housed a fan for ventilation, why not use a standard hatch mounted fan? I doubt it would be pulling air out of the carbody as that would be competing with air for the engine and cooling the DB grid that came in through the grilles. I guess putting more air into the unit could be useful but maintaining filters up on the roof would be a maintenance headache.

According to the order specifications, the unit was built with a steam pipe but no steam generator. Most F units were ordered that way so steam could pass through them (not all had connections) when operating in consists and so that stand-by steam could be used to prevent winter freeze ups. (If there is any interest, I’ll put one of the F unit Specifications on the file server.)

My first thought was that it was a roof mounted water tank. They were needed because of the distance between stops for water.

Since receiving Dale’s request a few days ago, I have been going through the diesel memos and letters we have scanned….none make reference to Sou 4260 or anything unusual.

Here’s a reduced size version of Southern drawing DL-2097 for a 500 gal roof mounted water tank dated July 25, 1952. 

(There are presently 962 scanned diesel drawings in the SRHA digital files, and many more not yet scanned. If this kind of “nuts and bolts” subject is of interest to anyone make plans to A: Join SRHA and B: Come help in the archives.)

Ike



On Dec 1, 2019, at 1:39 PM, D. Scott Chatfield <blindog@...> wrote:

An attempt to improve engine room ventilation. Answer is on P.338 of Diesels of the Southern Railway 1939-1982 (Withers with Calloway and Wilson).

Just because it's in a Withers book doesn't make it correct.

I don't see how it would help "engine room ventilation."  F-units did not have pressurized carbodies, and I don't see any vents on the box.  Also note the box is on the front of the NP B-unit and the rear of the Southern A-unit.

To me the box looks like a roof-hung water tank from a passenger-equipped unit, but neither of these units were passenger-equipped.  No pass-through steam lines either.  Perhaps it was a water tank and they couldn't mount it flush because of something inside.

Doesn't appear to hold radio gear either.

So that leaves us with the only logical explanation:  increased headroom so basketball players could use the toilet.

Scott Chatfield


locked Re: F-Unit Roof Hatches

D. Scott Chatfield
 

I gave it a little more thought and I wonder if these were former roof-hung water tanks filled with concrete to add weight.  I don't have an old Locomotive Summary book (my oldest is from 1975, and she was retired in 1973) so I can't look up 4260's weight.  But if that box is full of concrete it should add about 10 to 11,000 pounds to the engine, assuming it extends down into the carbody about a foot.  Any deeper and it would interfere with the doorway.

A normal F-unit weighed between 230,000 and 240,000 pounds.  Was 4260 heavier?


Scott Chatfield


locked Re: F-Unit Roof Hatches

D. Scott Chatfield
 

An attempt to improve engine room ventilation. Answer is on P.338 of Diesels of the Southern Railway 1939-1982 (Withers with Calloway and Wilson).

Just because it's in a Withers book doesn't make it correct.

I don't see how it would help "engine room ventilation."  F-units did not have pressurized carbodies, and I don't see any vents on the box.  Also note the box is on the front of the NP B-unit and the rear of the Southern A-unit.

To me the box looks like a roof-hung water tank from a passenger-equipped unit, but neither of these units were passenger-equipped.  No pass-through steam lines either.  Perhaps it was a water tank and they couldn't mount it flush because of something inside.

Doesn't appear to hold radio gear either.

So that leaves us with the only logical explanation:  increased headroom so basketball players could use the toilet.

Scott Chatfield


locked Re: F-Unit Roof Hatches

Bill Schafer
 

Thanks, Jack and Ike. I have the Diesels of the Southern Railway book here at home, but I don’t have it memorized yet. :-)

On Dec 1, 2019, at 1:03 PM, C J Wyatt <cjwyatt@...> wrote:

An attempt to improve engine room ventilation. Answer is on P.338 of Diesels of the Southern Railway 1939-1982 (Withers with Calloway and Wilson).

Jack Wyatt

On Sunday, December 1, 2019, 12:35:15 PM EST, Bill Schafer <bill4501@...> wrote:


I'm not a locomotive expert by any means, and one of our colleagues from White River Productions, Dale Sanders, has posed a question I hope someone in the group can answer. Dale says:

I'm in the process of completing a two-volume pair of books covering Northern Pacific's diesel fleet. While gathering photographs for the project, I've come across a photo for which I have no explanation. The NP modified one of their freight service F7Bs with a unique roof hatch extension. See attached photo (the roof hatch extension in question is at the far right). None of my living NP experts have an explanation for this modification.


Then, I came across the attached page from the April/May 1970 issue of X2200 South.


 There is the same [or similar] roof hatch extension on a Southern F-unit, again with no explanation. I'm hoping you may be able to answer the question that has been haunting me for some time now. Why did the Southern (and the NP) make this modification? 

Any insights will be welcome - I'll pass them on to Dale. 

Thanks.

--Bill Schafer


locked Re: F-Unit Roof Hatches

C J Wyatt
 

An attempt to improve engine room ventilation. Answer is on P.338 of Diesels of the Southern Railway 1939-1982 (Withers with Calloway and Wilson).

Jack Wyatt

On Sunday, December 1, 2019, 12:35:15 PM EST, Bill Schafer <bill4501@...> wrote:


I'm not a locomotive expert by any means, and one of our colleagues from White River Productions, Dale Sanders, has posed a question I hope someone in the group can answer. Dale says:

I'm in the process of completing a two-volume pair of books covering Northern Pacific's diesel fleet. While gathering photographs for the project, I've come across a photo for which I have no explanation. The NP modified one of their freight service F7Bs with a unique roof hatch extension. See attached photo (the roof hatch extension in question is at the far right). None of my living NP experts have an explanation for this modification.


Then, I came across the attached page from the April/May 1970 issue of X2200 South.


 There is the same [or similar] roof hatch extension on a Southern F-unit, again with no explanation. I'm hoping you may be able to answer the question that has been haunting me for some time now. Why did the Southern (and the NP) make this modification? 

Any insights will be welcome - I'll pass them on to Dale. 

Thanks.

--Bill Schafer


locked Re: F-Unit Roof Hatches

George Eichelberger
 

Here is a ground level view of Southern 4260 and its hatch. Of many Southern diesel photos in the archives, 4260 appears to be the only unit with this modification. Photo taken by Jas. H.Wade at Hendersonville, NC 7-30-72, SRHA Archives - Oscar Kimsey, Jr. collection.

Ike


locked F-Unit Roof Hatches

Bill Schafer
 

I'm not a locomotive expert by any means, and one of our colleagues from White River Productions, Dale Sanders, has posed a question I hope someone in the group can answer. Dale says:

I'm in the process of completing a two-volume pair of books covering Northern Pacific's diesel fleet. While gathering photographs for the project, I've come across a photo for which I have no explanation. The NP modified one of their freight service F7Bs with a unique roof hatch extension. See attached photo (the roof hatch extension in question is at the far right). None of my living NP experts have an explanation for this modification.


Then, I came across the attached page from the April/May 1970 issue of X2200 South.


 There is the same [or similar] roof hatch extension on a Southern F-unit, again with no explanation. I'm hoping you may be able to answer the question that has been haunting me for some time now. Why did the Southern (and the NP) make this modification? 

Any insights will be welcome - I'll pass them on to Dale. 

Thanks.

--Bill Schafer


locked Southern weed spraying trains in 1960s

Alexander Smart
 

Hello 

I model Southern outdoors in 1/29 scale and indoors in HO, in Oban, Scotland.
I need more information, photos and possibly diagrams of the consist of these trains.
I checked Ralph Ward’s Southern Railway Pictorial which shows such a train at Asheville in July 1973: CNO&TP F7 6119, caboose X636, UTLX tank car 39918 and 2 special sprayer cars including 991495.
I have in 1/29 an F3, caboose and tank car but need to adapt and detail a couple of flatcars to the sprayer car specifics. 
This would make a very unusual and striking extra on my garden railroad!
If anyone has more information, particularly photos or diagrams of these cars, I would be very grateful.

Kind regards

Sandy Smart


locked Re: Southern B36-7

WR
 

Bob 

I was hoping you would chime in. I guess I should have waited a few minutes more before typing my last reply. Thank you for the info and also confirming my conclusion on GE delivering all 6 with white boards.

As I stated the Rapido models all have the white boards and they all have 3 antennas. This is a minor mistake in my opinion and easily corrected. I have only had them for 2 days, but I would give Rapido a 9 out 10 for their effort. It seems that regardless of the manufacturer, mistakes are made. Some easily corrected, others not so. As a long time Southern modeler I can recall a time when the only way to get a Southern model was to kitbash it or scratch build it. So I will take what becomes available and fix the bugs.

Thanks again for your expertise on Southern motive power.

Walt 


locked Re: Southern B36-7

WR
 

Thanks Scott for the info. I have the Southern Motive Power 68-82 book, but was (still) confused by it listing only 3815 and 3816 as RC equipped units. The Paul Withers Southern Motive Power 1939-1982 book has a photo of 3818 with 3819 trailing with both units wearing white number boards. Caption on photo dated April 2, 1981 at Ludlow, KY states units were on their first run on home rails. Builders date is 3/81 so they were fresh from GE. Both upper and lower baffles are present on 3818. After more research today, I have located photos of all 6 units with white numbers boards. But as you stated I cannot see the additional firecracker antennas on 3818. A photo on Tom Daspit's site dated July 12,1981 shows 3816 with white number boards and 3 antennas followed by 3820 also with white number boards but with only one antenna visible on the cab. 2 more photos found on the RR pictures archive site by Bernie Feldman dated Nov 22, 1981 at Atlanta GA show 3815 white boards and 3 antenna followed by 3818 with black boards. The other photo shows 3816 with white boards and 3 antenna followed by 3820 with black boards. Also of interest in these two photos are the exhaust stacks of 3815 and 3816 covered in plastic wrap. Probably all 6 units were there at the same time. Conclusions from this photo trail can lead one to believe that all 6 B36-7's were delivered from GE with white number boards regardless of Locotrol equipment installed. A mistake by GE similar to the lettering style on the U30C's.
From the two Bernie Feldman photos one can assume that the units were being shopped at Atlanta to correct these mistakes 8 months after being delivered. 

My modeling period is late Sep early Oct of 1981, so I guess I am safe leaving the white boards on all 3 units, but the additional antennas on 3818 and 3819 will have to go. :-)

Walt


locked Re: Southern B36-7

Robert Graham
 

SOU B36-7 3815, 3816 were equipped with Locotrol and had the 3  antennas on the roof. The Locotrol equipment was deactivated in 3815-3816 circa 1984. The 1985 NS form 1014 shows these 2 equipped only with provision for Locotrol, but no longer active or capable as leaders.

SOU 3817-3820 were never so equipped.

GE erred upon delivery in 1981 and all 6 (3815-3820 ) were delivered incorrectly with white number boards with black numerals, documented photographically. SOU quickly corrected this mistake and 3815-3816 only were shortly after delivery the only 2 with the proper white number boards indicating Locotrol master. The other 4 went to the proper black number board with white numerals.

The B36-7's were delivered in 1981; the NS merger occurred June 1982. The NS adopted the N&W number board standard of white with black numerals. After several years, former SOU locomotives that had been equipped with black number boards with white numerals began having the new standard of NS white number boards installed. When a former SOU locomotive was seen with the white number boards, it would raise the attention of the casual observer to think it was Locotrol equipped. This era can be confusing to the modeler and locomotive historian regarding number board color and what it means. Just "finding a photo" is only useful if the date it was made is known to be able to view it in proper context.

I have not seen a Rapido B36-7, so can not comment on how well other details were replicated. But, I can state that Rapido and its representatives were made fully aware of the full array of SOU B36-7 details and peculiarities prior to production.


Bob Graham

   


-----------------------------------------

From: "WR"
To: main@SouthernRailway.groups.io
Cc:
Sent: Tuesday November 26 2019 2:50:59PM
Subject: [SouthernRailway] Southern B36-7

Here's some questions for the motive power gurus. 
I have just received my Rapido B36-7's. Rapido chose to model numbers 3816, 3818, and 3819. All three have the white number boards with black numerals indicating the units were equipped as Locotrol masters. Also have the extra antennas. 
From the limited photos I have located in books and online this appears to be correct. So did all 6 B36-7's come from GE with Locotrol installed?
It also appears that the Locotrol equipment was removed after a short time, evidenced by the black number boards with white numerals in later photographs. When was the Locotrol equipment removed from these units?

Walt Rieger
Covington, LA


locked Re: Southern B36-7

George Eichelberger
 

We have the Specifications, order quotes and documentation on virtually every diesel the Southern purchased starting in 1940. Let’s remember, and make the time to check the file on the B-36-7s for Locotrol equipment before or during the December archives work session. 

(The 2020 archives work session schedule will be in the next TIES and on the SRHA web site. For 2019, we moved dates from the third weekend (defined as a Friday and Saturday) to avoid Monday holidays. For 2020 some sessions will be on a three day weekend. That may make it easier for people that have to come from farther away to visit the archives.)

Ike


On Nov 26, 2019, at 4:08 PM, D. Scott Chatfield <blindog@...> wrote:

According to the Withers & Sink book "Southern Motive Power 1968-1982" only the 3815 and 3816 had RC gear.  Only two are pictured in the book, 3815 and 3818, both in 1986.  Both had black numberboards.  3815 had an extra firecracker amidships which tells me she had Locotrol.

A photo of brand new 3818 and 3819 in X2200South#73pg15 shows the white numberboards but I don't see the firecracker amidships.  Hmmm...

FWIW, I don't recall seeing the B36s when I worked at Inman in the early '80s.  The B30s, yes.


Scott Chatfield



WR <ratholer138@...> wrote:
Here's some questions for the motive power gurus. 
I have just received my Rapido B36-7's. Rapido chose to model numbers 3816, 3818, and 3819. All three have the white number boards with black numerals indicating the units were equipped as Locotrol masters. Also have the extra antennas. 
From the limited photos I have located in books and online this appears to be correct. So did all 6 B36-7's come from GE with Locotrol installed?
It also appears that the Locotrol equipment was removed after a short time, evidenced by the black number boards with white numerals in later photographs. When was the Locotrol equipment removed from these units?

Walt Rieger
Covington, LA


locked Re: Southern B36-7

D. Scott Chatfield
 

According to the Withers & Sink book "Southern Motive Power 1968-1982" only the 3815 and 3816 had RC gear.  Only two are pictured in the book, 3815 and 3818, both in 1986.  Both had black numberboards.  3815 had an extra firecracker amidships which tells me she had Locotrol.

A photo of brand new 3818 and 3819 in X2200South#73pg15 shows the white numberboards but I don't see the firecracker amidships.  Hmmm...

FWIW, I don't recall seeing the B36s when I worked at Inman in the early '80s.  The B30s, yes.


Scott Chatfield



WR <ratholer138@...> wrote:
Here's some questions for the motive power gurus. 
I have just received my Rapido B36-7's. Rapido chose to model numbers 3816, 3818, and 3819. All three have the white number boards with black numerals indicating the units were equipped as Locotrol masters. Also have the extra antennas. 
From the limited photos I have located in books and online this appears to be correct. So did all 6 B36-7's come from GE with Locotrol installed?
It also appears that the Locotrol equipment was removed after a short time, evidenced by the black number boards with white numerals in later photographs. When was the Locotrol equipment removed from these units?

Walt Rieger
Covington, LA

1421 - 1440 of 2024