I notice that Athearn, and perhaps other manufacturers, often markets the F3A as both a passenger locomotive and a freight locomotive.
To me, both locomotives look identical.
What are the differences, both in the prototype and in the model manufactured by Athearn, to distinguish between a passenger and freight locomotive?
Rich
Rich,
In my experience, at least with F7’s, the pilot, & the steam generator section/utilization is usually an indicator for my modelling. As a side detail is the addition of a dynamic brake, but that could occur on any version.
I took an Ath Genesis FP7 & replaced the front pilot (the streamlined, straight flat one), with what was considered a ‘Freight’ pilot (the contoured one) to model the Prototype that is 4½ blocks from where I live. Cresco, IA’s MILW 101A
I am NOT an expert on any locomotive, but I had the Highliner parts on hand to attempt the conversion on the Ath Genesis, to match the unit in our park. Although I tried very hard to blend the color match, the pilot & the PE hatches are just a bit brighter than the factory paint.
Don’t know if that helps or not, but that is what I look at, when it comes to F units…
PS: I think I will have to offer & help fix the Prototype dingup on that one’s pilot… heh heh…
Chad,
Thanks. That helps a lot.
The main reason that I ask about the difference is that I have an Athearn Genesis F3A/B Freight consist that I want to use for passenger operations. I know, it’s my railroad, and I can do what I want, but still I would like to remain prototypical to the extent possible. If the differences between passenger and freight are insignicant in appearance, then I can live with using freight locos for passenger operations.
Rich
Hi Rich,
Depending on the railroad, the passenger and freight F units might be in different paint schemes, so that makes a very noticeable distinction. Other than that, the main detail differences would be:
• Stack and vents on the rear roof hatch for a steam generator (on B units only for some roads).
• Water tank fillers in the carbody sides (may be on both A and B even if A lacks a steam generator).
• Cover plate for steam line connection below coupler opening in pilot (again, even if the A lacks a steam generator).
*Steam connections at the rear of the A and both ends of the B (but the Athearn models don’t include these).
There are also two different pilot configurations, one for exposed couplers and one for coupler doors, but as it turned out both types appeared on both freight service and passenger service F units, so they aren’t a reliable distinction.
So long,
Andy
In warm weather, ie, when steam heat wasn’t needed, sometimes freight units pulled passenger consists, at least on the frugal Reading. So it wouldn’t be completely out of place for a non-steam generator F unit to pull passenger cars. Runs were short with frequent stops so the typical higher speed gearing used on pasenger units wasn’t needed. The passenger units then could also be used in freight consists, and were - especially as passenger service declined.
–Randy
Not sure if this was mentioned…
GEARING was a major difference as well. Obviously lower gearing (thus more pulling power) for freights, higher gearing for passenger (more speed, less power).
The Santa Fe is my favorite example (& RR), and we often associate the blue/yellow F unit paint schemes with freight and the warbonnet paint scheme with passenger. That may sound and look nice, but the ATSF had a number of FT and other F unit locos in the warbonnet scheme that were freight ready - with the different gearing, added steam facility, etc., of their passenger pulling brethern…
An F3 is an F3 is an F3.
The railroad ordered it from GM with the options it wanted, just like you might buy a GM car and request options like power steering, automatic or standard transmission etc. As noted, if a railroad wanted to use their Fs in freight might gear the engines for a top speed of 60 MPH, while one wanting to use them as passenger engines might gear them to go 90. The railroads could change gearing later, but it was something that had to be done in the shops.
A railroad serving a mountainous area might order dynamic braking, while a flat land railroad wouldn’t.
The A version of F3s engines could fit a steam boiler and a small water tank to be used to heat passenger cars, but the B units had space for a steam generator and a large water supply where the cab would be on an A unit. As noted in an earlier post, you could see the external generator exhaust on the roof near one end of the engine (the rear in an A unit).
Some F’s were used either way - an A-B set of F3s with a steam generator and water tanks in the B unit might run a local 3-4-5 car passenger train in the morning, and return with a freight train that evening.
Common practice on the Reading was to have passenger units NOT have dynamics, and freights to have them. This applied to the GP-7;s, RS-3’s, AS16’s, and Trainmasters. Passenger units were x60 and higher, thus 607 is a frieng GP-7, 662 is a passenger one. The only F’s for passenger use were some FP7’s, two of which still run and a third is awaiting restoration. Go figure, one fo the least numerous class of locos on the railroad with the most still around (in Reading paint - there are later locos still in revenue service on CSX and NS, or were, recently). AFAIK, the passenger units all had the same gearing as the freight units, except perhaps the FP7’s. Have to go dig out a few books to confirm that for sure, but photos exist of mixed units on freight trains and summer passenger traisn pulled by freight units.
–Randy
Guys,
I don’t want to distract this thread, as I too would like to learn more about the Early F Units.
Andy,
You mentioned there may be a water filler on the side of the unit with Steam Genrators? Is that up on the body shell (in modelleng sense) or down in the under carraige like the fuel filler?
I’ll attach a picture of Cresco’s FP7, MILW 101A, for a reference. I was under the impression that the caps in line with the portholes & louvers were sand fillers, & when referencing the Highliners Documentation when I was custom building this one, It looks like the MILW Shops added a few F9 details (louver panels, if I recall). Anyway, I am interested where the water fill would be. This one does have the roof exhausts & vents for the true P version. However I have not been able to figure out what the Pipe is that runs from the area where the dynamic would be to almost the center of the cab. Something was removed & plugged there. It’'s a unique unit, like many of the MILW units for sure.
Thanks guys!
Thanks everyone for all of your comments and observations about the differences in the F3 used for passenger and freight service.
I was surprised to see the word "freight’ on the cover of the box from Athearn. It had not been mentioned in the description of the loco on the Athearn web site, and my intention is to use the loco for passenger operations.
Rich
Rich, as everyone has pointed out, EMD F units where built with a long list of options and variations to suit each railroad.
Best to learn about the railroads you are interested in and how they had theirs built.
Some mountain railroads prefered F units for passenger service over E’s or other passenger “specific” designs. Many such railroads had lower speed or moderate speed gearing like a freight loco but all the other “passenger” options.
The Santa Fe had lots of ABBA F unit sets for passenger service. They had GM only put steam generators in the B units, and put larger water tanks for the steam system where the steam generator would have been in the A units. Special piping connected the steam water supply of all four units to the two steam generators.
The B&O had F3’s both ways - with steam generators and without - all geared the same (for freight speeds) if I recall. But their later F7’s were all freight only.
The combinations of options are endless - it all depends on the the railroad and their needs for that loco.
Sheldon
This could be useful:
It’s one of 5 boiler-dorms that UP had. I’ve read that they were built to be stuck on the backs of really long trains because the “heat” couldn’t get all the way to the back of the train without them.
or:
GN had a bunch of these. The first ones were built to supply heat for trains when they were pulled by electrics through the Cascade Tunnel. They looked like stubby baggage cars. This one is representative of later ones that were used to supply additional steam–from the front of the train, I believe.
Say, which loco did you get–what railroad?
Ed
Ed,
It is the Erie-Lackawanna.
Rich
After you’ve put steam generators in the A- and B-units give them a series of numbers to distinguish them from the similiarly painted freight units.
Now wasn’t that easy?
Easy?
Sure, easier said than done.
Rich
I don’t know much about the EL, but I think it would be fun to build your own steam boiler car. Perhaps something based on this:
http://www.walthers.com/exec/productinfo/932-4159
or
http://www.walthers.com/exec/productinfo/932-4158
You could do a patch job on either, making them EL. By studying pictures of the UP and GN cars, you could fake up a pretty convincing roofline. Don’t forget the fuel and water supply and storage. And the trucks would have to go, I think. They were declared unsafe pretty quickly. A regular freight truck would probably look not too far off. I think Athearn used to make a short wheelbase passenger style truck, but I don’t see one on their site right now. They do make a 4-wheel old style passenger truck, though, that might work.
I think it could be fun.
Ed
Those are the sand fills, The water fill is back under the rear edge near the rear edge of the carbody. The water tanks are actually behind the cab and also up top hanging near the dynaics. Without dynamics, a larger tank could be fitted, with dynamics, a smaller 330 gallon tank was used. The main tank on a FP7A was 820 gallons.
–Randy
A dynamic brake equipped FP7(9) could have a water tank underframe mounted behind front truck like this example: