In the old days, of streamliners, fancy passanger service and cab units, some of the cab units like Alco PA and EMD E units had certain gear ratio versions which alowed them to go up to 117 mph
So I was wondering, what was the fastest portion of any US passanger route of that time (before Amtrak)?
In August 1967, I took the train from SLC to Chicago. It started out as a UP train in SLC and I don’t remember who took over in Omaha. However, across Iowa out of Omaha, we were clocking the train at between 110 and 115 mph by the mileposts. It was a thrilling ride.
dd
By August 1967 all UP passenger trains were run via the Milwaukee Road to Chicago (since 1955)- there are stories of the straightaways west of Perry and out in the nowhere lands outside of Cedar Rapids where the Cities streamliners did “cheat” a little on the speed limits. I’ll have to check my old TTs to see what the speed was between Iowa stops (Perry and Marion).
As for the fastest intercity route pre-Amtrak, you can look it up on a year by year basis in old Trains magazines thanks to the Annual Speed Surveys. Each passenger run in the nation was listed and fastest runs per region were noted. The old speed surveys were some of the best things to read when I dug through my dad’s old Trains magazines. It wouldn’t be too hard to go back to those surveys and see which train ran the fastest consistent run between stations in each region and nationally. Unfortunately, my dad’s back issues are in Wisconsin- and I’m here in Texas, so I’m not able to look!
My gueess would be the Panama Limited on the Illinois Central surely near the top of the list; pre-Amtrak, and before they tore out the second main between Chicago, Memphis and New Orleans. Not sure what the schedules were, but in actuality,breaking a “dollar bill” was a routine event on the Main-line of Mid-America.
Milwaukee Road’s Hiawatha F7 4-6-4 Hudson (Alco, 1938) routinely exceeded speeds of 120 mph between Chicago and Milwaukee, according to the Kalmbach-published The Hiawatha Story by Jim Scribbins. Passengers were always amused by the signs along the ROW that said “SLOW TO 90 MPH.”
so which engine was guilty of that? The alco or the F7 diesel?
As far as I know F7 diesels could go much faster than 100, or are the numbers wrong?
In the most oversimplified terms, it depends on the gear ratios, as well as track condition, train weight and number of axles, grade and curvature. Also, after 1947 (and some say, at the beneath-the-table behest of the trucking and bus industries) ICC set maximum track speed limits that in some cases seriously hobbled performance overnight (both freight and pax).
The F units usually did better than Es in mountainous/hilly territory because there were more powered axles/HP which means more tractive effort at a given gear ratio for an equivalent HP set (e.g., 3 F7s–12 powered axles and 4500 HP–equals 2 E9s also at 4500 HP, but with only 8 powered axles). On the flats, the Es could really fly. But a PA could generally run rings around both Es and Fs on schedules with multiple stops and slow orders/speed limits, because it could out-accelerate them. An example of this latter issue in the mountains: Before the consolidation of 1/2/3/4, TNO pulled the Sunset (1/2) east of El Paso and over Paisano Pass with 2 PAs; Pacific lines swapped them at ELP and west of ELP on the old EPSW with 3 E units (approx 50% greater HP) and basically the same train consist all the way to CA and over Beaumont Pass.
But regarding your question as to trains at the top of the old list in the 50’s/60’s, for example the Panama and CONL were pulled by E’s, as were the Burlington trains and Century and Broadway (usually–both PRR and NYC also had PAs that might have substituted occasionally), and the Super almost always had a veritable fleet of Fs on the head end. The PRR Congos were, of course, GG1s, as was the Senator.
The old B-RI (FWD-RI) Sam Houston Zephyr between DAL and HOU was another member of the “slow to 90” club, along with the MILW Hiaw
I know it depends on the gear ratio. The data says F units came with multiple kids of hear ratios, the fastest one alowing just over 100mph
The E units with smallest gear ration rat up to 117 mph
So, could they run faster in reality? (providing that there were enough units for HP)
What would be the actual maximum possible speed for F units and E units?
The fastest gear ratio of which I am aware that was sold by EMD on an F unit was 56:21, which produced a nominal maximum speed of 102 mph. For an E unit and also the PA, the fastest ratio sold of which I am aware was 52:15 for 117 mph. These were primarily manufacturers’ sales decisions. Remember, they started out selling the Es and PAs for pax use, which were conceived when operations included higher top speeds than were imposed in 1947, and the Fs were marketed for freights, where starting torque at the axle (translated at the rail to tractive force) is far more important than top speed. The F units were adapted for pax use, and why would one want to sell an optional gearing for a top speed and application that the interested RRs (who had discovered the F unit’s obvious superiority in grade/curvature-constrained territory where high speed isn’t as big an issue) viewed as not being all that important, since 102 was usually at the very high end of a good compromise?
That being said: Could the E units actually run faster? Depends on the circumstances and your definition of “faster”. If you’re talking about potential top speed, then in theory, yes, the E unit with the higher ratio wins. If you’re talking about shortest elapsed time on a schedule (i.e. highest average speed) on a given route, then it’s more complicated. In the mountains, the F unit wins hands down over the E. On the flats with an express schedule (few or no stops), bet on the E, all other things being equal. If acceleration is a significant issue (which it can be, particularly on a local, commute or mail train), pick the PA, then the F. Keep in mind that the RRs did not necessarily buy the highest gear ratio available for their locomotives–that choice was dictated by the nature of the anticipated end use and the operational and geographical characteristics of the line. For example, locomotives purchased primarily for commute a
The fastest Pre-Amtrak (and still speed record holder for the USA) was the United Aircraft Turbotrain. The train reached 170.8 mpr in tests (faster than the Acela) and was put into service in the USA and Canada. There’s a bit of an asterix there with this one though as they never went anywhere near that fast in the USA in regular service, however they did hit 130 and as high as 140 in service in Canada. The fastest steamer is and always will be a debate, The Milwaukee Road F7s were probably the best mix of speed and utility, but the theoretical top speedster could have been (and probably would have been if they’d been allowed to) a few engines actually. The ones I’ve heard mentioned included the Pennsylvania S2 and the Chessie Steam Turbine. Flat out engine races were actually a big thing in the late 1800s and around the turn of the 20th century but unless you count the 20th Century Limited vs. Broadway Limited fights approaching Chicago, they went out of style. The absolute railroad speed record in the United States, belongs to the New York Central’s test Budd RDC that had two J-47 jet engines bolted to its roof. It hit 183.85 mpr in the summer of 1966. This doesn’t count for practical use (and never was intended to) because it could never see actual service. Cheers! ~METRO
From my notes:
The Milwaukee Road’s chief design engineer C.H. Bilty and chief mechanical officer L.K. Silcox designed the 4-6-4 locomotive as a high speed passenger engine in 1924. Detailed design drawings were submitted to both Baldwin and Alco, the largest steam engine builders of the time.
The Milwaukee’s 1925 bankruptcy proceeding interrupted plans to purchase a series of the engines. The New York Central Railroad stepped in and ordered up a prototype of the Milwaukee design from Alco, number 5200, and it was delivered in early 1927.
A non-streamlined engine, the same engineer and fireman had conducted all of the exhaustive tests of the engine, and fell in love with this wonderful machine. They asked to be assigned to her when she went into regular service.
The New York Central eventually ordered up 255 of the Hudson-type engine. The Central’s crowning glory was a streamlined design by Henry Dreyfuss for the Twentieth Century Limited. The “J-3” model Hudson encompassed 15 Hudson engines, beginning with one in 1938. By 1945, the shrouds were in a sad state and the streamlined era of steam ended on the New York Central when the shrouds were removed.
The Hudson, when it came home to its original designers at the Milwaukee Road, reached its design zenith. Initially purchasing 22 unstreamlined versions designated the F-6 from Baldwin in 1930-1931, Otto Kuhler took over the design and in 1938 Alco delivered six of the F-7 version, "massive beautiful machines … superior to the NYC’s J3’s in performance and maybe even looks. They were BIG enough to do the job whil
But the fastest SCHEDULE before Amtrak was, of course, the Penn Central Metroliner. I don’t have the shedule with me, but start-to-stop Wilmington to Baltimore was something like 75-80 mph and to speed was supposed to be 110, but I read 136 on the digital readout standing behinid the engineer o the front platform. Of course the digital readout could have been wrong. On the Tubotrain, the fastest I observed was 110.
As I understand, the limitations of theoretical top speed are the centrifugal forces on the motor armature rotating at high speeds. If that’s even remotely true, wouldn’t something like the Milwaukee Road’s bi-polars have the greatest theoretical speed, with-in effect-a 1:1 ratio?
So which engines they used to speed up to 110/136?
couldn’t be the EMD F units, accoarding to drephpe
Please note the picture of the Hiawatha above – that’s not a diesel, folks. Milwaukee had two pairs of absolutely magnificent steam engines for the Hiawatha. The first two were 4-4-4, and rather unconventional in several ways. Not the least of which was that they were superbly balanced and quite capable of what was then the fastest scheduled running, stop to stop, of any line in the US (and, outside the northeast corridor, I believe the fastest scheduled running in the US at any time). They weren’t quite heavy enough, however, as the Hiawathas became longer, and so two 4-6-4 streamlined Hudsons (shown in the picture) were built instead. They weren’t quite as fast, in terms of top speed, but maintained the same sort of schedules.
Other really fast steam engines in the US and Canada? There were a bunch of them, all capable of over 100 mph on a good day on good track; you could then – and still can – get a lovely argument going on which one was ‘fastest’ or ‘best’ (note that our friends in the UK still hold the official record, though – Mallard). New York Central could show the streamlined Hudsons and the Niagaras; Pennsy had the K-4s and (dare I mention them?) the T-1s; Wabash had some slightly odd Hudsons which could move rather well; the UP 800 series wasn’t exactly slow; both CN and CP had some lovely fast Hudsons and Northerns… there are those who might argue for the SP 4-8-4s… and so on!
The first Metroliners were high-performance MU cars. According to Steffee’s speed surveys from that period, start-to-stop Wilmington-Baltimore timings were in the 95+ MPH range. Overall average speed from New York to Washington based on time of 2:59 was about 75 MPH. A nonstop New York-Washington run was scheduled at 2:30 for an average speed of 90 MPH.
In 1969, a morning suburban express comprised of Jersey Arrow MU cars averaged 80 MPH nonstop from Trenton to Newark before continuing to Penn Station. Was this the fastest suburban train in the United States?
A couple of minor discrepancies above. The Milw A class engines were 4-4-2s, the first 2 built in 1935 suplemented by 2 more in 1937. The 6 F-7 Hudsons were built in 1938. All 8 engines had 84" drivers which accounted in part for their speed capability. The only other US engines w/ 84" drivers were the Santa Fe 3460 class (6 engs), CNW E-4 class (6 engines, I think), PRR S-1 class 6-4-4-6, B&O Lord Baltimore and Lady Baltimore (1 engine each). I believe the CPR had some of the Jubilee 4-4-4s w/ 84’ drivers.
All well and good, but now, with 75+ years of innovation and technology behind us, our trains now run at speeds of up to 79mph! (except NE corridor)
Ah, progress!
These are OPERATING speeds for trains elsewhere in the world:
TGV-NG=225mph
Shinkansen=200mph
UK Inter-city 125=125mph
UK Inter-city 225=140mph
UK INter-city 250=155mph
Germany ICE=174mph
China HSR=175mph
High-speed Rail News: http://www.artech.se/~sandblom/archive/hst.html
Just before Amtrak, the fastest stretch of trackage that diesel powered passenger trains ran on was the 100 mph trackage on the IC near Carbondale. The Milw and Santa Fe both had many 90 mph sections of trackage. These speeds were authorized by the ICC due to maintenence/signaling features on these routes. The fastest ‘start to stop’ scheduled diesel passenger run was on the CB&Q - it was listed many times in the old Trains Speed Survey.
Gear ratios in diesels are based on the ‘maximum rotational speed’ of the actual motors that are geared to the drive wheels. If they spin too fast under load, the copper windings with become soft and ‘creep’ outwards until they ‘short out’ on the motor case. This is called ‘bird caging’ or a ‘ground short’ and the motor needs to be isolated until they can change it out. In EMD E units, the maximum speed could vary between 85 mph and 117 mph, depending on the gear ratio. The CB&Q E units were geared with a 98 mph speed(very popular by the time of Amtrak). I rode in several runs between La Crosse and St Paul, and on one run(1968), we had #32 up to 106 mph going through Hager City, WI. I was suprised that there was no overspeed alarm/limiter tripping off. I am sure if there had been a heavy load on the engines, it might have ‘bird caged’ one of the traction motors. Many of the early E unit purchases had the famous 117 mph gearing. IIRC, the GN purchased pairs of E7’s with this gearing, and overheated traction motors on Marias Pass as they could not keep the train above the minimum continuous speed for the electrical gear. BTW, I think Alco adverties the PA’s with a 120 mph gearing - anyone who can verify this?
Jim
Amtrak still gets 90 MPH where the BNSF is equiped with ATS. That includes the Needles sub and a good chunk of the Surf line. Probably most of the transcon too but I’m not sure about that.