I’ve seen a couple of photos, in books and online, of an FM passenger C-Line (CPA-24-5) leading a Hudson steamer, with the steamer apparently working (lots of smoke coming out of the stack). Here’s an example (at a station):
I now own both a CPA-24-5 and a Hudson, and I’d love to recreate this. Anyone know the circumstances? Was it helper service or was there some other reason to double them up? I didn’t think the Cs were used for helpers, I thought they were mainline locos. I figured they could have broken down, but then wouldn’t the Hudson be up front?
Gidday Aaron, an interesting photo of which I know not the circumstances.
However, what I ‘ve managed to glean from the photo is that the CPA-24-5, NYC Class DPA-6, road number 4507 was built 4/1952.
I can’t get the road number for the Hudson, but as all the NYC Hudson’s appear to have been scrapped by 1957, for what it’s worth, the photo had to be taken between 4/52 and 57.
Hopefully someone, (perhaps Tom), may have some actually helpful information.
Cheers, the Bear.[:)]
The one additional thing I was able to find was that the location was given as Jackson, MI. That seems to match the photo below that I found for the old Michigan Central depot:
Note the dormer at the far end, as well as the roofline of the 2nd building. That looks exactly like the one above and behind the C-liner in the photo you linked to, Aaron. Additional photos and information of the station and area can be found here.
I don’t know much about Jackson but it may be that there was a grade into and/or out of town that required pusher service. I know that was the case for Bellefontaine, OH. IIRC, it was a slow 1.5 - 2% grade coming up from Cincinnati (south) where often both freight and passenger trains (heading north to Cleveland, Toledo, Indianapolis, or Detroit) needed a helping hand.
Terrific photo, Aaron. Thanks for posting a link to it. [:P]
An engine is an engine. If you need a second engine to get a train over the line and one is available, you use it. It’s not like the island of Sodor where the “big engines” feel it’s beneath them to be helpers.
Well, all of what you brought up are the confusing bits. The CPA-24-5s were fairly new (and had steam generators), and I think NYC bought them for front-line service, not helpers… though maybe whatever was around, helped. The other pic, btw, is in the New York Central Later Power book – that one’s at my club, and I’ll try to snap a pic of it later. Shows the Hudson furiously steaming away.
I’ll see if I can find anyone to ask at the NYC Historical Society – if I get an answer, I’ll share it!
Before they were retired & scrapped in '56/'57, a few Hudsons managed to hang on a little longer as helper service in places like Cincinnati. It would kinda strange to see one in that role after so many years as the flagship locomotive of the NYC in passenger service. I just wish they had saved one of them for posterity. [sigh]
The line rises about 70’ in the first 2 miles WB out of Jackson and the Grand River Valley, or about a 0.7 % grade. Jackson was the shops town and a major engine terminal of the Michigan Central, so extra engines were readily avalable.
I can’t explain what the circumstances of that double-header were, but railroads found out pretty quickly that if you were going to double-head a steam locomotive and a diesel it was best to put the steamer in the rear. Cinders from the steamer would be sucked into the diesels air intakes if the diesel was in the rear.
Hey all! Thanks for the great info. (I hadn’t thought about the consequences of a diesel behind a steamer!)
I emailed the NY Central System Historical Society (https://nycshs.org/) and this is what they told me:
–
Here is what our expert says:
The photo was taken in Jackson, Michigan. The ACF 48-seat coach/baggage behind the Hudson tells me that the train was likely a Detroit to Chicago day train. The Hudson was under steam. There typically isn’t a need for a helper on the Detroit to Chicago trains.
There is another photo in the archives showing the same power match up, but on a mail and express train.
Most of the DPA-6a photos in the archives show working in pairs and singles. Most all the Detroit to Chicago trains commanded a pair of diesel passenger locomotives.
So it’s an educated guess, that there was not a second DPA-6a available in Detroit, so a Hudson was added.
–
Sounds plausible enough to me! Annnd, more importantly, a good exuse to double-head the C-Liner and the Hudson. Neatly solves the problem that the Hudson can’t get a long-ish train up
Gidday Aaron, thanks for following up with the additional information, a great photo. I note that it is dated 1955.
From what I’ve read the eight NYC DPA-6a C Liners were repowered with EMD 16-567C engines in 1955-56, which would of course affect availibility. So, IMO, your educated guess is entirely reasonable.
Correct you are – NYC also re-engined their 2000 hp CFx-20s, but the CFx-16s kept their OP engines. Some, but not all, of their freight Erie-Builts were repowered as well, while the passenger Eries had their original engines rerated to 1750 hp. I believe all of NYC’s carbody FMs were retired by their 15th birthday. Switchers and hood units seemed to keep their engines, but none save a few of the switchers were around for the Penn Central merger in '68.
Back around '86 or so there was a great article in Trains by NYC’s road foreman of engines – I have it around here somewhere. IIRC, he said the FMs were the most expensive engines to maintain and repair – 5x the baseline of an EMD locomotive. Alcos were 1.5x more expensive than EMDs to maintain. I also read that because the FMs were such a pain (lower piston damage was a problem, and replacement required removal of the entire upper crank/rod/piston assembly; same for a cylinder liner) that shop foremen would sometimes shove them to the back and prioritize locos that could be repaired and returned to service more quickly.
This photo just popped up on Flickr and I thought I’d share it. I’ve got a nice Trix Mike and a pair of Genesis gray passenger Geeps so i could easily replicate this train, including the Riley’s parlor-obs:
UPDATE: We are well on our way. Today I tested my BLI Hudson with a Tru-Line Trains CPA-24-5 I just bought. The dummy coupler on the front of the Hudson works with the C-Line’s Kadee, and while my speed-matching needs a bit of tweaking, so far they seem to behave together. (The Hudson slips a bit while the QSI-equiped FM gets going, but spinning steam drivers are realistic, right?) Our tractive-effort tester indicates that these two locos together should get a 14-car train up the 2% grade.
Over the holiday break, I’ll build the train… I’m thinking a nice mix of baggage and head-end, couple of sleepers, a diner, coaches. Maybe a lounge, and I haven’t decided if I’ll use an obs car or just trail with a sleeper.
