I asked a friend of mine who was a bit of a media historian why shows in the 50’s like “Superman,” “The Lone Ranger,” “The Cisco Kid” and others were shot in color when there were so few color TV’s at that time.
His answer was so simple I was surprised I didn’t think of it myself. At that time many parts of the country didn’t have television at all, so those aforementioned TV shows were shown in movie theaters as shorts. Being shot in color made them all the more exciting.
Thanks for that clip Mr. Damon! For thoise who don’t know, the red-headed lady with the great smile is Noell Neill, the “Lois Lane” from the “Superman” TV show of the 50’s, AND the “Superman” movie serials of the 40’s.
That stately looking gent sitting across from her? That’s Kirk Allyn, the “Superman” from the 40’s serials!
And, appropriately enough, the “Kansas Star” is pulled by a “Superman Diesel!”
I remember hearing on a production which Trains Magazine helped create, the F7 → F9 change coincided more with the changes to their road switcher equivalents, the GP7 —> GP9. Basically, like this.
7-series produces 1500 HP
F7: Full-width cab units
FP7: Full width cab unit equipped with steam heating
GP7: 4 axle hood units
SD7: 6 axle hood units
9-series produces 1750 HP
F9, FP9, GP9, SD9 were essentially identical mechanically sans their carbody layout or number of axles (or presence of a steam generator in the F’s case). EMD continued this method with its later second generation power such as the '45’s and 40’s. Notice that all of EMD’s passenger units between the FP45 and the F69PHAC had the same horsepower as a freight unit with the same model number. All units in a number series are identical in terms of horsepower and mechanics, but vary with certain essential details. F was kept on to distinguish units having full-width bodies instead of what the F stood for on the original FT. This is because the only passenger carrier that really required new equipment were commuter systems and Amtrak. That and the introduction of turbochargers and the like eliminated the need for any special twin-engine designs (what really set the E’s apart from the F’s mechanically). As for the SDP40F, I can only assume the F wasn’t in front because they were also built for quick-conversion to freight serivce if Amtrak ended up failing (indeed a number of them did end up in freight service on the ATSF and BNSF as SDF40-2).
Back to the 1950’s, the E’s pretty much stayed in their own model series as passenger traffic was drying up in the 50’s, and there was little desire for a passenger-only locomotive. I imagine EMD sorta switched back to more specified models for passenger units with the DE/M30AC and F125, since they are designed more specifically for a
Okay, I kind of understand that with the boosters (the same program explained that on the Santa Fe, only the B-units were equipped with steam generators). I’m slightly surprised that F7A’s had them as well, considering how short they were lengthwise. Then again, they could just have them installed and not be able to have them work without the water supply in the B-unit…
I dunno, I’ve never seen plain F7’s working a passenger on their own without a B. At least, not until the 1980’s when some railroads began equipping them with HEP for commuter service.
My source was the Second Diesel Spotters Guide. “…lengthened to supply extra steam generator and water capacity for passenger service.” They show a photo of a Frisco FP7, but it does not look like in this case they utilized all the extra space underneath for extra (fuel) tank space. Here is a picture of a Reading unit that has a similar tank arrangement:
The B&O had a series of steam generator equipped F3’s. They were purchased to head up the streamlined Columbian and other trains. In use it was found that the water capacity for the steam generator was insufficient. In real world use on the Columbian, with the engines being fueled and watered at the Robey Street coach yard in Chicago - the train being taking to Grand Central Station for passenger boarding and then the trip to the crew change point of Garrett, IN - the engines would arrive with the steam generators shut down - OUT OF WATER. The engines would be watered at Garrett and complete the rest of the run with watering facilities that had been established for the E units that hauled the bulk of B&O’s diesel passenger service.
With the Western carriers having longer runs than the 150 miles from Chicago to Garrett, I am certain the F series units that these carriers used had additional water capacity.
I think at least some FP 7 and FP 9 units had a vertical cylindrical tank on the centreline internally between the main generator and the electrical cabinet.
Santa Fe who never used FP units, always had the steam generators in the B units, and these might have had internal water tanks as well.
The Santa Fe had the A units of all their passenger F units carrying a water tank were the steam generator was supposed to have gone. The B’s carried a tank up front and the generator in the back.
You’re missing my point. I know the historical evolution. I’m stating given the likeness in configuration between steam and the diesel road switcher, one would think that the operational advantages would have been apparent when the first diesels were designed. The F’s and E’s were strictly chosen as a marketing ploy in aesthetics. The RR’s were going down at the hands of the airlines, and they wanted something that resembled the nose of a DC-3.
You’re missing my point. I know the historical evolution. I’m stating given the likeness in configuration between steam and the diesel road switcher, one would think that the operational advantages would have been apparent when the first diesels were designed. The F’s and E’s were strictly chosen as a marketing ploy in aesthetics. The RR’s were going down at the hands of the airlines, and they wanted something that resembled the nose of a DC-3.
No.
The cab unit allowed maintainers to fix things en route.
The FTs were built with the first 567 engines. The 567s were dramatically more reliable than the 201A. See McCall’s “Santa Fe’s Early Diesel Daze” and more authoritively Eugene Kettering’s ASME paper on the development of the 567.
Also, there was a war on and changes were not looked on favourably.
So the FT became the standard freight unit basically by default. It was much more reliable than the EA to E2 series of passenger units, but not even EMD could have predicted that in 1939. Hundreds of them were built and the railroads liked them. Post war, they were even happier with the F3 and F7.
By this time Dilworth had realised that the power equipment was now reliable enough to put it in a hood body, since it could run without needing attention during the journey.
Alco Fairbanks Morse and Baldwin made the same change somewhat earlier, but perhaps without the degree of justification that EMD had by the time the GP7 appeared.
The change from a steam locomotive to a hood unit did occur on roads that were late converting to diesel. N&W never owned a cab unit, although they leased some.
But the cab unit was a neccesity in 1937 for the early E units and Rock Island’s TAs.
Illinois Central had some big transfer units that were effectively FTs with hood bodies, but they never strayed far from a workshop, even though in retrospect they probably could have run main line fre
Another reason why cab units where preferred at first over Road switchers types aka GP or SD types was due to the Railroad worker Unions themselves. They tried to demand that every cab in the consist have a engineer and fireman in it even if it was the trailing unit in the consist. They were so bent on demanding this that Santa Fe reworked their first orders of FT’s into A-b-b-b units with only 1 cab to stop the unions. UP did the same with their E units for a long time.