Any data that the EMD FT Demonstrators 103 were used on passenger trains? If so, what Roads and trains? (Not sure they were even steam generator equiped.)
Appreciate the assistance.
I seem to recall photos of the 103 on NP’s North Coast Limited.
In order to be used on passenger trains they would have needed steam boilers for heating and cooling. Find a picture showing they had boiler vents on the roof or steam hoses on the back of the B unit and they probably were tested somewhere.
I’ll second the NP as one RR they tested on passenger trains. I’ve got the book on FT’s at home, maybe that goes into more detail?? Think there are some pics of the FT’s on the NP in “The Northern Pacific of McGee and Nixon” book.
What was used on the “Train of Tomorrow”?
The Train of Tomorrow operated behind a new EMD E7A and when the train finished demonstration tour was sold with the four car train to the UP.
I remember that it went to the UP, and now that you mention it I recall that it was headed by an E. Thanks for the intel.
There are photos of EMD 103 in the Santa Fe Early Diesel Days book of the units hauling a Santa Fe HWT passenger train. The photo was taken in Topeka, KS. The units were taken off of the train and weighed on the company scales
Ch
Well I checked my book (“The Revolutionary Diesel: EMC’s FT” from Diesel Era), it’s not all inclusive but does say FT 103 did pull NP’s North Coast Limited, and has a pic of it pulling Santa Fe’s California Limited. It lists other roads the FT’s ran on but it doesn’t specify what service they saw. I have the video on the rebuilding of the FT 103 A/B units for the 50th anniversary in 1989-90 and that has some more detail on FT 103, might have some info there.
I’m sure someone SOMEWHERE has done an in depth article or a chapter in a book detailing what FT 103 did and where it went…if not, good idea for an article!!
BTW you get a coupon for this book if you buy a Stewart FT !!
Oh p.s. I couldn’t find out in the book for sure that it had steam boilers for passenger service but I’d be 99.9% sure it did - otherwise it wouldn’t have been pulling passenger trains in January 1940, plus the book notes that many of the first FT orders in 1940 were for models with steam boilers for passenger service.
Where would they have put the steam generators. All F units built for passenger servive had the FP designation and were built on a longer frame and body to allow room for the steam generator or later headend power. If you saw an FT pulling a passenger train it was as a freight unit. The first spotting feature of a FP is if it is long enough to have a steam vent and a water tank beside the fuel tank.No water no steam period… [2c]
The steam generators on the FTs were located in the “B” units, when so equipped. Kalmbach’s Second Diesel Spotter’s Guide says of the FTs, “The B unit has considerable space in the overhang area for steam generaator capacity . . . .” (p. EMD-90.)
And many railroads had at least some F units equipped with steam generators, among them NYC, GN, NP, SP&S, RI, DL&W, C&EI and CGW.
The steam generators did not leave LaGrange in the B unit but were added to the extra space in the units after they left the factory. Any unit designed with a steam generator had a FP7A or FP5B designation. I am using these #'s as an example only…[2c]
FP models were a separate deal, they were A units that were several feet longer than their F unit counterpart to allow the steam boiler. Steam boilers could go into almost any GM road engine, including GP’s (Soo Line) and SD’s (Missabe). But many railroads had F units (particularly B units) that had steam boilers and F units with steam lines. Santa Fe for example never had FP’s that I know of, but used FT’s, F3’s, and F7’s in passenger service, as did Great Northern and many other railroads. So…all FP-7’s were passenger diesels, but not all F-7’s were freight diesels.
wjstix has it right. A few roads, including NP, RI and CGW had FP7s (all units of this designation were cab-equipped “A” units) and F3As or F7As equipped with steam generators.
There were no FP3s or FP5s, and the only domestic FP9s were the two units CNW had “remanufactured” from FTAs.
It was not untill the F3’s that EMD even offered a steam generator as an option. This was only because there customers were modifying the existing units. If you see an FT with a steam generator EMD did not install it. There could not have been a FT demonstrator with a steam generator. It would have been installed after it was sold.
Not one single passenger Santa Fe F3A’s or F7A’s had the steam generator. All of the B units for passenger service had the steam generator but the A’s did not on the Santa Fe. Each railroad would purchase equipment and use it like they wanted. Since most of the Santa Fe passenger sets of F’s were ABBA to start with and later ABB sets, the B unit provided the steam.
Don’t know that the FT demos pulled any passenger trains. They may have posed for photos with some passenger equipment. The original FT set wasn’t equipped with steam generators (a requirement for passenger service at the time), nor where they geared for passenger service. EMD’s purpose in dispatching the FTs on tour was to demonstrate to the railroads that this was the freight locomotive of the future. Later F units, notably F-7s and F-9s did great work in passenger service.
From “EMC’s FT: The Revolutionary Diesel” by Diesel Era:
Pg. 7: States that among FT 103 assignments was “pulling Northern Pacific’s North Coast Limited between Livingston and Missoula, Mont.”
Top of pg. 7 shows a photo of FT 103 in Nelson, Arizona. The caption states “On the Santa Fe, 103 was assigned to Train 4, the California Limited.”
Same page talks about the earliest FT orders from GM. ATSF were the first to order FT’s, followed by GN: “Great Northern ordered a pair of A-B sets with the B-units containing steam generators. Many orders specified this option.”
Pg. 23: It says Atlantic Coast Lines first FT’s came in late 1943. “Although used almost exclusively in freight service, the units came equipped with steam generators in the B units.”
Pg. 65: Notes FT 103 was used on Great Northern on the Mesabi Iron Range, then “split into two A-B sets, the units worked passenger and freight trains between Superior and St. Paul, Minn.”
Remember, GM had been putting steam boilers in diesels since at least 1934, so it wasn’t new technology.
Just because a locomotive doesn’t have steam generating capacity, that doesn’t mean it can’t haul a passenger train. It just can’t furnish steam for radiators in the cars. If the ambient temperature doesn’t call for heat, it’s not an issue. (As noted above, January in Montana would suggest the need for steam heat.)
Likewise, lack of high-speed gearing doesn’t prevent a loco from pulling a passenger train. It may not be able to achieve track speed for passenger service in high-speed territory, but that also may not be a biggie.
It would have made sense to demonstrate the 103 in passenger service, to show off the versatility of the machine. The subsequent orders for passenger-equipped F units proves this aspect of the demonstration trip was a huge success.