Models versus prototype pilots on diesels


T

trailrider

Well-Known Member
Without naming any particular manufacturer or marketer, because I've seen too many examples, but almost all the HO scale model F-7 diesel "motors" (locomotives) decorated for C.B.&Q. have freight pilots, whereas the "Q" used passenger pilots on most of their freight cab units. The exception was on the early FT's and F-2's. The difference is that the freight pilot dips inward below the anti-climber, whereas the passenger pilots come straight down from the anti-climber and the front couplers were generally hidden behind clamshell covers on the lead units. (When an "A" unit was run backwards behind others, the couplers were, of course, exposed.) Now, I do understand that most railroads used freight pilots on their freight diesels, so a model manufacturer that is decorating for different roads has to keep the model generic enough. But maybe they could provide a separate passenger pilot that could be used to model the "Q" units.
 
The Proto 2000 PA1's that I have came with an opening in the shell so they could be run in either leading or trailing positions and were provided with 2 clip in inserts with the A unit to fill that space. One was an extended outwards cover, that presumably represented a cover over an installed coupler and the other was flatter by comparison to represent when a coupler would not have been in place.
Extended cover in place
1536273203573.png
 
Doesn't the US Federal Regs require all rolling of all types to have operating couplers on opposing ends of the rolling stock to allow the the removal of the equipment in case of a equipment failure and assistance is required to push or pull the disable equipment from the site. Passenger equipment and locomotives would not be an exception.

Didn't some passenger units have covers over the front couplers?

Greg
 
Hard to reply without naming specific manufacturers but I have at least a couple CB&Q F units that came from the vendor with the proper pilot. As I recall at least one of the vendors units did come with a two separate pilots and two different coupler covers so the purchaser could choose which version to use. So it is possible, but as you point out probably not commercially viable for the low end vendors (thinking of the recent Bachmann F offering).

Interesting trivia question - how many F7s did the CB&Q own, and why did they never own any F9s?
 
According to one source I looked up the Q had 6 F-7A's, the C&S subsidiary had 6, and the FW&D had 6. The FW&D had a single F-9Am. The Q had 3 F-7B's, the C&S had 6 F-7B's and the FW&D had 6 F-7B's. I suspect that the Burlington Route went to road switchers fairly early. One thing that is bound to confuse is the fact that they numbered their A-units with A, C and sometimes D suffixes to the engine numbers. I think the reason they didn't have that many F-7's is they went to the earlier cab units, starting with the FT-A/B in 1944 and progressed through the F-2, F-3's through the 1950's. By that time, they went on to the road switchers, starting with the GP-7A's and GP-9A's and later SD-7's and -9's, etc.
 
trailrider said:
By that time, they went on to the road switchers, starting with the GP-7A's and GP-9A's
Click to expand...
And that is the second part. They switched to the 2 year old GP7s. Apparently they thought that maintaining fewer classes of locomotives was less expensive than the return on investment for the higher horse power units.
 
The Q did some interesting things with their "motors" as they called all their diesel=electric locomotives. For example, according to the latest BRHS bulletin, a number of the their original FT's came from EMD with headlights on the nose doors, and Mars lights at the top of the nose. Some did not, however, and had the nose-door light added in the Q shops. While a number of F-3A's came from the factory with headlights on the nose doors, others did not, having them added in the railroad's shops. Then, of course, they had two F-3A,B,A sets decorated as passenger units for use on the California Zephyrs on mountain divisions. These did have passenger pilots. But why so many of the other cab-freight units (after the FT's and F-2A's) also had passenger pilots, I can't guess. Then, there was the odd-ball E-5's, which were basically E-6's with the corregated stainless sides, for use with their Zephyrs, especially by the C&S and FW&D. Last I heard, the world's only actively operating E-5 is at the Illinois Railroad Museum.
Perhaps oddest of all were the "shovel nose" EA's that had their pilots cut off altogether, additional vent grill's added to give the traction motors more air when running backwards...as booster units with E-7's, 8's and even E-9's. (The shovel nose units were withdrawn from service with crews after a number of serious accidents killed and/or injured a number of engineers and firemen, due to the low position and close proximity to the front of the crews. The Brotherhood finally insisted on better protection, and the "bulldog" front end came into service...perhaps simultaneously with the manufacturer's and the road's decision.) Of course, my "love" of the Q stems from having ridden the Zephyrs to see my grandparents in the 1940's and early '50's.
 
trailrider said:
Perhaps oddest of all were the "shovel nose" EA's that had their pilots cut off altogether, additional vent grill's added to give the traction motors more air when running backwards...as booster units with E-7's, 8's and even E-9's.
Click to expand...
I was unaware the CB&Q shovel noses were classified as EAs. When someone says EA I think of those of the production run. I therefore thought only the B&O and AT&SF had them. Any photos of the cut ones?

(The shovel nose units were withdrawn from service with crews after a number of serious accidents killed and/or injured a number of engineers and firemen, due to the low position and close proximity to the front of the crews. The Brotherhood finally insisted on better protection, and the "bulldog" front end came into service...perhaps simultaneously with the manufacturer's and the road's decision.)
Click to expand...
I was going to mention this earlier in the thread, but didn't for some reason. The CB&Q was at the forefront of developing the anti-climber for the early diesel units. The anti-climber idea had been around for a very long time, but originally no one thought to apply it to the Zephyrs. Too many grade crossing accidents were ending up with the "hit" vehicle ending up in the cab of the locomotive.

Notice the extra notch and more vertical attitude of the ribs in the pilot in the second photo.

s-l300.jpg


3fdd889896515712725495694395cdab
 
Last edited:
Notice the dents in the "forehead" above the marker light! Anticlimbers don't do much good when the vehicle with which you collide is a gasoline tanker truck! Not sure which unit, 9002 or 9003 or some other, but the IIRC the engineer was killed and the fireman severely burned! :( Apart from those unpleasant incidents, the Zephyrs were fun to ride in as a passenger. Learned to balance without holding onto anything, and would watch the conductor or brakeman back us out on the wye at Burlington, prior to going down the Mississippi toward my grandparents place at Quincy, Illinois, in the 1940's and early '50's. Sometime in that timeframe, a barge stuck the railroad swing bridge that took the trains from the Missouri side to the Illinois side, so the train could stop at Quincy Main Station. As a result, they went into West Quincy. My grandfather would pick us up in his 1949 Oldsmobile to take us back over the river. I also remember that the station at W. Quincy consisted of a standard weight coach off its trucks, until they built a "real" one.

BTW, I haven't had any collisions between my shovelnose Zephyrs and vehicles on my HO scale layout. I just make sure to pick up any vehicles by hand, before the train gets there! :cool:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.



Back
Top