BRHSLIST
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: CB&Q F units

To: BRHSlist@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: CB&Q F units
From: Denny Anspach <danspach@m...>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 16:35:24 -0800
In-reply-to: <1046387536.28108.8500.m12@yahoogroups.com>
References: <1046387536.28108.8500.m12@yahoogroups.com>
John writes-
the NYC received all of their F-3's and the first few orders
of freight F-7's with what many refer to as a "passenger" pilot.

The Milwaukee Road did the very same. The rationale that I have heard is that the smoother "scoop" contours of the passenger pilot, and the coupler cover made it far more difficult to "snag" whatever the pilot may come up against (i.e. automobiles, hapless cows, etc.), thus lessening the possibility of derailment. They soon found out, apparently, that the coupler covers were more trouble than they were worth, making this type of (presumed-expense) pilot unecessary.

The concept of hiding the pilot coupler to avoid "snagging" collisions was also behind the various types of cast steel steam locomotive pilots where the couplers were swung away in various forms to allow a clean smooth pilot surface. Although the NYC (like the Burlington) had these types of modern pilots on its largest and most modern steam engines, both passenger and freight, ironically, the seeming great bulk of its great steam freight locomotive fleet (including the vaunted Mohawks) ran essentially with no pilots at all: just a skeleton frame "pilot" only to hold foot boards!

Denny


--
Denny S. Anspach, MD
Sacramento, CA

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • CB&Q F Units, railbass
    • Re: CB&Q F units, Denny Anspach <=