I have always heard that Santa Fe had the most diesel locos during WWII because they needed them to operate in desert climates. I was also told that they reserved most of the steamers for cooler climates and where there was more abundant water supplies.
This makes sense to me but, what about SP? Didn’t they operate in more desert terrain that Santa Fe?
The Santa Fe and UP connected the heavy industrial areas of the Midwest to the Pacific Ocean ports of California. The SP transcon was a southern connection to the mostly agricultural south.
Also, the Santa Fe passed through the high desert. SP was at much lower altitude. I suspect there was more and better water along the SP.
Chuck (Modeling Centrl Japan in September, 1964)
Chuck’s comments were correct as far as they go, but in fact the Santa Fe had already purchased its first FT freight diesels in early 1941 before the Japanese attack and the German declaration of war. Neither the Southern Pacific nor the Union Pacific committed to large-scale dieselization of freight service until after WWII. It would be hard to make a case that those roads wouldn’t have benefited from having freight diesels to help with the surge of wartime traffic, but their managements weren’t ready to be “early adopters.”
By the way, the SP served as the western connection of the UP’s “Overland” transcontinental route through Ogden, Utah, had an important transcontinental route itself by way of its connections through the Rock Island and the Cotton Belt with important Midwestern terminals, and served a large number of military training and staging installations.
So long,
Andy
Remember too that during WW2 the government (thru agencies like the War Production Board) had the final say as to what products went where. Many railroads tried to order FTs during the war but were allocated new steam engines instead. Diesels went to where they were most needed and were determined to be most helpful for the war effort. So it could be other railroads might have had more diesels if they could have purchased them…although as Andy S noted, ATSF was ordering diesels before the US entered the war and saw benefits in diesels that perhaps some other roads didn’t.
Ironically, the Minneapolis & St.Louis railroad ordered new 2-6-6-2 steam engines to handle their heavy wartime traffic burden - and instead, were sent new FT sets!! The railroad had also requested an allocation of steel to rebuild one (or more?) bridges so that the bridges could handle the new heavier steam engines, and the gov’t decided it would be better to send them diesels instead so they didn’t need to strengthen or rebuild the existing bridges.
While the ATSF may have had the most road diesels, I would be suprised if it had the most diesels (all types). Diesel switchers had been popular for years and I would think that a road like the PRR would have had more diesel switchers, and thus more diesels overall.
Also don’t forget, during the war the ATSF wanted more diesels, specifically passenger locos.
After getting the FTs, they had to settle for the 2900 Class 4-8-4s and 5011 class 2-10-4s. Tully impressive machines to say the least, but not exactly what the Santa Fe would have wanted if not for the war.
If not for the war time restrictions, the 2900 and 5011 class likely would have never been made and would have been diesels.
Read here for more info if interested:
I suppose it depends too on whether the question who had the most total number of diesels or what railroad had the highest percentage of diesels?? Some small railroads had bought diesel switchers before WW2 so may have had a relatively high pct. of their locomotive fleet being diesels, even though the actual number of engines was only say 20 or 30.
Diesel switchers were in production before the war, and many railroad did buy some, but generally they didn’t buy huge amounts all at once, so I suspect the typical large railroad’s diesel fleets would have been relatively small in 1941. I know by that time the New York Central had bought several different types of diesels, but diesels overall would probably only be like 5% of their total - maybe less.
Remember too that PRR and many other eastern railroads had access to a lot of coal, and may have had less incentive to get rid of coal burning steam engines than railroads in the west.
Pre-WWII photo taken at (John) Muir station (Martinez, CA) of eastbound passenger train. (The station was never rebuilt after it burned down shortly before the war. The site is still bare, appropriately on Muir Station Road between the east end of the Alhambra Valley steel bridge and the tunnel under state highway #4. Muir’s home is near the west end of the bridge.)
The Santa Fe was more receptive to freight diesels as early as 1941 but the War Production Board’s decision to give them all those FT’s in in war years was based on the fact that the Santa Fe had the only double track mainline connecting the East with the Los Angeles Basin and consequently was the most strategically important route to Southern California. Also, unlike the SP Sunset Route, the SF mainline had to climb Glorieta Pass, the Arizona Divide and Cajpn Pass all of which were severe grades. To surmount the Arizona Divide which was and remains the longest sustained mainline grade in the whole United States, the Santa Fe had to haul 300 carloads of locomotive boiler water per day for its steamers. That was a big burden on a line that was running trains on fifteen minute headings in both directions 24/7. Dieselizing this route as much as possible alieviated a lot of thorny problems as well as selling the industry on the wisdom of converting to diesels after the war.
