----- Original Message -----
From: <okt@j...>
To: <BRHSlist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2001 10:50 AM
Subject: [BRHSlist] Lines west (and south)
> All the discussion on the Lines West brings up something I've been
> wondering about.
> I don't see much on hear about the C&S or FW&D, do most of you consider
> them to be completely different, part of the Q system, or just no one on
> here is interested (or a combination there of)?
> For me, growing up in Okla, and not having seen the Q in it's natural
> setting the FW&D (and it's predecessors and the C&S ) is the closest
> thing I can relate too. The only other part of the system I've had an
> oppurtunity to observe is the line from Atchison to KC, and the K line at
> St Louis.
Terry -
The C&S and FW&D were interlocked to the Q by boards of directors, and were
regarded as part of the "Burlington Route" (and thus of the Hill Lines), but
for legal reasons, they were separate corporate entities. In steam days,
they had distinct locomotive classes, although some were patterned from Q
types, and toward the end of steam, C&S bought some Q steamers outright.
Diesels on the C&S and FW&D had different number series (for instance, C&S F
units were 700s rather than 100s; passenger diesels were in the 9950s on the
C&S and in the 9980s for the FW&D). Freight and passenger cars were also in
different classes and number series . . . for instance, as Accurail
accurately depicts, the CB&Q never had any USRA 55 ton hoppers, building
their own to an in-house design . . . but the C&S did. There were also
variations in way car design, etc.
They were definitely part of the Burlington Route, but with a whole
different flavor . . .
Marshall
|