I see photos on the 'net of the different “heritage” paint schemes on new locomotives. Let’s see, there’s the C&NW, the D&RGW, the KATY, the CRI&P, the MOPAC, and probably many others.
Most fans seem to love them. But for some reason, I just don’t feel any excitement about these “heritage” units. I’m not sure why, as a fan, I’m not turned on by them. But I think it’s because they just don’t really resemble the originals that much. (I’ll admit, the Rock Island one looks pretty good, since it’s so similar to the original.)
Well, if there’s any point to this rant, I guess it’s that I think “heritage” locos would look a lot better if they were done exactly to the specs of the original paint schemes. Also, it would look better if a later paint scheme from the heritage roads was chosen.
For example:
A heritage unit for the Great Northern would look decent in the later Big Sky blue scheme, since that scheme was originally designed for the boxy lines of the modern loco. But a modern loco would look just plain weird painted up in the streamliner-era Empire Builder scheme, since that was designed for rounded locos (F’s, E’s, etc).
Of course, I have no doubt that if they do a GN “heritage” unit, it will be a bizarrely stylized version of the Empire Builder scheme, with strange zig zags and pin stripes. [:S]
Well thee is the rock island unit for Iowa Northern’s Hawk eye Express that is painted in the scheme seen on passenger units. the only difference is the actual paint on the big stripe in the middle.
I can understand ambivalince toward heritage schemes. Either one was not around to see the original; was and is not interested in the railroad being presented; has no interest in railroad history; or has no sense of history and how we arrived at today. This is not a slam at anyone or any approach to railfanning. I am a DL&W fan, historian, nut, whatever you want to call me; thus DL&W heritage schemes might just tickle my fancy. Perhaps a 1950 paint scheme of some western or southern road wouldn’t be as interesting to me. So what, so be it. I do also like and appreciate the art or styling of the periods represented; I find them unique and interesting. So I might be a little more interested in them than say, Conrail blue next to a B&M blue next to a blue anything. But I don’t go bananas over the whole thing. I enjoy visiting the past but don’t want to live there. I want to know and appreciate the past and how it brought us to today and may take us to the future. So heritage units do nothing for you. Good, don’t feel bad, don’t have to apoilogize. You are into rairoading as it is today with no thought or apologies to the past or care what happened but enjoying them moment that is. The joy of railroading as a hobby is that their is a rich and vibrant history to be explored, a technological Behemoth to admire, and a wide open track ahead to be imagined. So much to the hobby you cannot condemn one who just concentrates on one part of it all.
Generally agree. Nevertheless, those classic schemes might look OK on a wide-cab with its broad resemblance to those older types, whereas on a standard-cab low-nose unit the paint patterns might wind up look like a KISS band member in full ‘war paint’ makeup for a heavy-metal concert . . . [swg]
My take on this subject has to do with freight cars. Several months ago, I saw a gray grain hopper with a Cotton Belt herald and the reporting marks SSW in a UP train eastbound through Maplewood. This was not an old, forgotten, car but rather a shiny freshly painted one.
Later I thought I saw a freshly painted MoPac gondola, also on the UP, but couldn’t get close enough to verify. I haven’t seen anything about this in any rail magazine and am wondering if UP isn’t just keeping their usage of old heralds on a current basis. Or maybe they are just playing games with us railfans.
It’s been surmised that one reason UP has done the Heritage fleet is to maintain control over the various fallen flags images, etc. I haven’t checked the AAR list of reporting marks, but I’m sure that the fallen flags are still allotted to either a remnant of the old road, or to UP.
The freight cars are an interesting development. Right after the Conrail breakup, we saw a lot of coal hoppers restenciled for NYC, but that was just how they divvied up the cars.
We’ve been having a debate over paint schemes on our tourist road. With two “new” locomotives, there was substantial discussion as to how they should be painted, with one faction favoring a NYC-based heritage scheme.
If I’ve got this correct after going through old copies of the Railroad Equipment Register, the surviving road gains the rights to the fallen flag’s reporting marks. Usually, this covers unrelettered rolling stock which is still in service, but I’ve observed that UP (and C&NW prior to that) is making active use of fallen flag reporting marks to which it has the rights for new rolling stock.
Some of the Class 1’s still use “Heritage” lettering and reporting marks on their equipment and it is notjust for PR purposes. In many cases the predeccesor railroads still exist as subsidiary companies under the parent road, even though they no longer operate independently…
I think that Larry/Tree68 is pretty much on target for the rationalle of creating Hertiage Equipment in any representation of a Current Owner’s properties. It is the preservation of uses of the forerunner lines names,logos and ‘good will’ that the current owner seeks to protect.
We now live in an era when individuals sue someone (thing) that they perceive may have deeper pockets and have not looked to protect them from a potential lawsuit; This might be called the mosquito bit me in the back syndrome(?)
If memory serves me correctly, in the times before Union Pacific announced they were going to create a ‘Heritage Fleet’ they were involved in a dust-up with the RR Hobby Model equipment producers. The clainm was that the producers of model rail rolling stock, and other items with rails manes and fallen flags applied were in violation of various issues of their ‘rights’ to those Corporate names and logos.(?). It was resolved by the assigning for consideration by the “owner” of the specific railroad identifers (logos, etc)
The 'Heritage Fleet" was then presented as an anchor to the UPRR’s ‘Rights’ to their forerunner carriers identifying marks.
THe idea for additional company’s to launch their own “Heritage” equipment seemed to take hold in the industry. IAIS used RI as their Heritage , basis for painting Bennett Levin’s PRR E_8s, NS using the 'Tuxedo, Black and White from Southern Rwy for their Executive Units, The ‘apple green’ Southern E-8A at NC Transportation Museum at Spencer, and also the NS Geep GP59 #4610 (linked)
So maybe UPRR was not the first to come out with the Heritage Idea(?). Why does a Corporation do such a thing? More likely, someone has realized the publicity and good will generated by
I am no fan at all of these heritage engs roaming around out there. Very railfan and media hyped in my opinion. Shippers in 2011 are doing business w/ Union Pacific not MP, CNW, MKT, etc.
Perhaps also because of conflicts, inconsistencies, and overlaps in the numbering ‘series’ for each type or class of equipment between the predecessor and current companies. In such cases the simpler and smarter move is just to keep the old reporting mark and numbers, which makes and keeps clear that it’s a ‘different animal’ from the current company’s similar type of equipment or same numbers.
In this Forum before on the topic of the new reefers (ARMIN) specifically, they seem to have resurected some old reporting marks. Noticed the other day on a WB BNSF some new “AUTO MAX” cars carried the mark (AOK). Prior to that one had noticed that AOK mark on a number of grain cars ( that mark and several older marks seem to show up a lot on WATCO’s property>
At the time these engines were coming out, a Union Pacific VP was even quoted (in Trains, I believe) as saying that a motivation for doing them was to assert the company’s right to the trademarks.
I don’t want to start another thread on trademarks (which a company has every legal right to protect), but just recall that UP did so in about as inept and graceless way as could be. The heritage locos are maybe fun to look at, but to me they’re just another reminder of the incompetence (think CNW and SP mergers) of the now-retired regime at Union Pacific.
I like the heritage schemes… it breaks up the monotony of always seeing the same scheme. Part of the fun in railfanning is seeing the unusual and the different…
I was going to point this out, the Heritage 1 and really the Heritage 2 scheme as well are well and truly GN heritage schemes. SP&S, NP, Burlington, Frisco and for the most part Santa Fe got nothing out of it.
As for UP’s fleet, the UP’s colors make me want to kick cats to begin with, so I’ll take anything over Yellow and Gray.
Indeed - with only 7 Class One’s and fallen flags rapidly disappearing, they provide a little variety. For the operating crews, they’re just another locomotive (particularly if you’re on the inside of the cab).
In a way, they hark back to the day when you could spend the time as a train passed reading the various slogans on the sides of the freight cars…
The slogans on the box cars were always interesting, especially for roads like ATSF, which seemed to have a dozen ads and slogans on their boxes. Another interesting period was the mid-70’s when boxcars became investment vehicles and any number of shortline reporting marks and paint jobs turned up.