BRHSLIST
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: [CBQ] Re: Trains orders to "C&M"

To: "CBQ@yahoogroups.com" <cbq@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: RE: [CBQ] Re: Trains orders to "C&M"
From: robert <trainbooks@hotmail.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2014 06:02:36 -0600
Delivered-to: unknown
Delivered-to: archives@nauer.org
Delivered-to: mailing list CBQ@yahoogroups.com
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoogroups.com; s=echoe; t=1389960158; bh=x1vBiXWVa/cAMt85ZgIBRDqQMLYFOAQd+/Kp0/k9Prs=; h=Received:Received:X-Yahoo-Newman-Id:X-Sender:X-Apparently-To:X-Received:X-Received:X-Received:X-Received:X-Received:X-TMN:X-Originating-Email:Message-ID:To:Importance:In-Reply-To:References:X-OriginalArrivalTime:X-Originating-IP:X-eGroups-Msg-Info:From:Sender:MIME-Version:Mailing-List:Delivered-To:List-Id:Precedence:List-Unsubscribe:Date:Subject:Reply-To:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:Content-Type; b=JuWt+ga/3oQ4EUn+a9oZuZ+//845aea7JrnIGR+9Fu+G4tXzy8UJzypYtjWTwlTcB7+/YTGFvfZRISgZa8DcHMOje9W2Xo/cs1C625afDz5XBD/JB73xgeaPeWykxCMu12kEfhxaVDnjREaoAfDlaWgZC+f5P4G7RyOwjieKkvs=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=echoe; d=yahoogroups.com; b=pAVcHyi8MsoAYoQT9efzpzlZIR4PMjh6fbL6ywS46C19WwMUAcPOShG/JNmqBJN60M3EnoUlt+rUngQa2nEhmk40s35dtQp67cZOrfrhkmMC5QyGuMLJ37eSZRu32iYWtdPP2lgURKBQVCUJQ2xaVotzT9QPx72jtWCvPnxQewg=;
Importance: Normal
In-reply-to: <C99F5DF3-AFB6-4A3F-8643-AFAE3D704290@gmail.com>
List-id: <CBQ.yahoogroups.com>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:CBQ-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com>
Mailing-list: list CBQ@yahoogroups.com; contact CBQ-owner@yahoogroups.com
References: <1389263996.186.67486.m7@yahoogroups.com>,<C99F5DF3-AFB6-4A3F-8643-AFAE3D704290@gmail.com>
Reply-to: CBQ@yahoogroups.com
Sender: CBQ@yahoogroups.com


From a "Frisco point of view", we had one conductor who referred to the engineer as "the motorman", and they really did not like that term.  Our TO's were addressed: C & E.
 

To: CBQ@yahoogroups.com
From: clipperw@gmail.com
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2014 10:19:34 -0600
Subject: [CBQ] Re: Trains orders to "C&M"

 
Pete,

I am sure you are aware that the Q always referred to diesels as motors right up through the early BN  days, not locomotives, engines or diesels. You had a consist of three motors on a train, not three locomotives or engines. I am sure that for people working for the RR, use of motorman was probably appropriate, particularly for the gas electric cars and early small Zephyrs. When I first went to work for Electro-Motive, some people who did not have direct contact with RR personnel, could not understand my use of the term engine for a locomotive. To many people in EMD, an engine was something that was installed inside a locomotive carbody. Of course the term motor for a locomotive is more closely associated with electric locomotives, but then, a diesel electric is an electric locomotive with it's own power source. So maybe the Q was more correct than most other RRs!

Bill Barber
Gravois Mills, MO

On Jan 9, 2014, at 4:39 AM, CBQ@yahoogroups.com wrote:

Wed Jan 8, 2014 7:48 pm (PST) . Posted by:

petehedgpeth

Leo...to add to the TO you saw....In the ICC report on the collision of the PZ and the south local at Napier, MO in October '39 the train orders were addressed to No. 21 MOTORCAR 9900. During my braking days most train orders were address to MOTOR NO 1234. I'll have to check if I've seen anything addressed to c&M. Although some were as above most were addressed to Engine No. 1234....seemed to be dependent on what the dispatcher wanted to do.

Pete




__._,_.___


Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>