I wondered as well, why Silver Salver, Feast, Manor and Inn were not
picked up by Amtrak.
I recall that Amtrak preferred cars without propane tanks for use
into NYC. Only cars with Presto Logs or wood burning stoves could be
used going into Pennsylvannia Station or Grand Central Terminal.
Hubert
--- In CBQ@yahoogroups.com, "milwaukeeroad261" <milwaukeeroad261@...>
wrote:
>
> Why not include diners Silver Salver and Silver Feast (both off of
> the third "Twins") in the question about the "Inn" and
the "Manor"?
> Granted, the "Twin" diners were high-mileage cars but I doubt there
> was anything structurally wrong with them that a good car
rebuilding
> shop could not have handled. There were four "identical" cars that
> Amtrak passed up for no obvious reason and then they had to go
> scraping for diners later and ended up with "one-of-a-kind" cars
> like 8044, which was a former KCS diner.
>
> As for the hot AT&SF coach; Southern, AT&SF, Milwaukee Road and a
> few others opted for steam-ejector air conditioning in some of
their
> equipment. That happened to be the system of preference for those
> roads' mechanical departments at the time. When it worked, it
> worked well....but when it didn't, the ride could be pretty
> miserable. All of the different car voltages and a/c systems were
> just a few of the problems that Amtrak had to deal with in their
car
> fleet in the early years.
>
> Don C.
>
>
>
> --- In CBQ@yahoogroups.com, "Stephen J. Levine" <sjl@> wrote:
> >
> > I remember that the original list of cars that Amtrak was going
to
> take did not include any Q cars, which surprised me. I would have
> thought that the Q cars would have been the most desirable because
> vestibule doors and climate control systems were the simplest. On
a
> zephyr, it seemed that the only air-operated sliding door on the
> whole train was at the dining room end of the diner. Cooling and
> heating systems operated independently of each other.
> >
> > I remember in June of 1975, on a San Francisco Zephyr trip, my
> wife and I were riding in a 1952 ex-Santa Fe coach, behind which
was
> one of the 1956 ex-DZ coaches. The latter got sidelined when a
> water pipe broke in it and people were moved into the our car. But
> then the air conditioning failed in our car and, because it was
tied
> into a complex climate control system regulating both heat and air,
> the car became unbearably hot. So we ended up moving into the DZ
> car where the water vapor made the car cool. It was simply
> ridiculous that a car's heating system would remain on when the air
> conditioning failed, but that was the Santa Fe's complex climate
> control system. Had the water line not broken in the ex-DZ car (I
> think it was the Silver Bit), it would not have had that sort of
> failure.
> >
> > I think violations of the KISS principle in post-war passenger
> equipment made the situation worse for Amtrak in its early years.
> >
> > hjebone <stu5632@> wrote:
> > Steve,
> >
> > I was at transportation college on 5-1-71, and went to work for
> > Amtrak on 6-12-72 and remained there until 1979 when I took a
> > sabbatical. But I had been a fan since 8-22-63 when I rode #17
> from
> > Chicago to Oakland. While not in the operating department, my
> > collegue & I were different from our other co workers, as we
> actually
> > got out and rode the trains, especially #5 & #6, The San
Francisco
> > Zephyr. It, for at least the first few months was hastily renamed
> the
> > City of San Francisco, then the SFZ, after D&RGW's last minute
> change
> > of heart, before 5-1-71, but after Amtrak PT #1 was printed.
> >
> > Without digging out my entire Randall archive and Don pulling out
> his
> > early consists, I can tell you a little of what went on from
> memory.
> > At first, Amtrak announced it would only buy the 1300 newest cars
> for
> > the system, all 100% stainless. Period. This was woefully short
of
> > what it would have needed for even a February consist of the CZ
or
> > the Broadway. Amtrak, as someone opined, was married to Penn
> Central
> > from the 'git-go', and some of its and the GM&Os equipment was in
> > such unsafe condition, some of those trains got all new consists.
> But
> > it varied from day to day and month to month.
> >
> > I can remember riding in mostly UP,ATSF and SP diners west of
> > Chicago, and even some western road stuff east of Chicago. The
DZ,
> > which ran daily from Chicago to Denver only, usually had a Q
> diner.
> > Amtrak insisted, at least for the first two years, nothing carbon
> > steel painted, except UP was allowed on the property. This hurt
> > availability with a big 'ouch'. I was told at the time by some
wag
> > that, "the railroads picked out what they wanted for exec trains
> and
> > such, and the junk that was left over went to Amtrak.'' I'm sure
> Bill
> > Kratville and others could debate that one! Suffice to say, we
> have
> > slides of four of the CZ obs taken from the Polk St bridge in
> > Chicago, parked next to the old REA building on the Burlington
> side.
> > And they sat there for months and months and months, until Amtrak
> > decided what to do with them. Initially, they wound up on the
> Texas
> > Chief, of all places.
> >
> > By the oil crisis of 1974, this all went out the window. We
> started
> > to see all sorts of smooth side GN, NP and other railroads' cars.
> As
> > to why they picked certain Q cars, while others got sold or
> sidelined
> > was and is still anybody's guess. My favorite contradiction was
> this
> > one: we were ALWAYS short baggage cars. Amtrak would not touch
the
> > Havelock baggage cars from 1952, and as a result, they all wound
> up
> > in company service. Yet, they would buy prewar SCL baggage-dorms.
> By
> > 1974, they begged the SP to let them have the 1962
> > SLCC 'Economy' bags. SP agreed, and they were sorely needed. When
> we
> > got them,
> > most were in turnkey shape, and some in fresh paint! Early in the
> > game, they would not
> > even look at any prewar Q Budd equipment, but bought tons of it
> from
> > the Santa Fe and the SCL. My favorites were the 3380-81. The
> original
> > 1937 Chief lounges.
> >
> > I guess what I'm trying to say is: 1) At first there was no
> apparent
> > rhyme or reason to it. 2)When it became painfully obvious in '72-
> '73
> > that there was an acute equipment shortage, the prewar taboo came
> > off, but by then, the Q cars were in work train service. And 3)
by
> > 1974, they would buy or lease anything that would roll, including
> the
> > KCS' Stuart Knott, which had been in company service. Stu was
> already
> > painted boxcar red, and had a KCS MofW stencil in the center of
> the
> > car, where the shopman got too close with the silver paint, and
it
> > dribbled down behind the stencil. Such were the days of
> the 'Rainbow'
> > trains. As far as I can remember it!
> >
> > --- In CBQ@yahoogroups.com, "Stephen J. Levine" <sjl@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Of course, we know that, within only a few years after Amtrak
> > selected its cars, the Silver Inn ended up in a derelict
condition
> > with other Burlington equipment. Obviously, the BN didn't need it.
> > >
> > > http://rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=721784
> > >
> > > Bob Webber <rgz17@> wrote:
> > > Bill Kratville / Autoliner was the one who decided which
> > western cars
> > > ended up in Amtrak, of the offered cars. Autoliner refurbished
> > some,
> > > some were done by Pullman, some elsewhere. At the time, and for
> > many
> > > years before and since, Bill worked for the UP.
> > >
> > > If BN wanted to retain cars for company service or for whatever
> > use -
> > > even to selling the cars to non-Amtrak entities (like the
> Mexican
> > RRs
> > > or Autotrain), they could do so. Autotrain ended up with some
31
> UP
> > > domes, along with WPs domes, and some AT&SF full domes. Since
> the
> > > five diners were extremely similar, I would think that the
> earlier
> > > diners would be more "preferable" strictly due to low use. One
> was
> > > essentially a spare for the CZ, the other two for KC trains -
> which
> > > didn't have a whole lot of use (compared with the DZ cars which
> > were
> > > in full use all the time). The NCL cars would be less
preferable
> > > simply due to their construction - and again, harder use.
> > >
> > > They likely had an inspection of all the cars, checking
> especially
> > > the running gear, and desirability of the interior - and picked
> the
> > > two to retain.
> > >
> > > Note that some railroads, esp. the UP, but also the AT&SF
> regretted
> > > losing so many of their cars and ended up purchasing quite a
few
> > back
> > > from various sources.
> > >
> > > At 12:32 PM 6/29/2008, Stephen J. Levine wrote:
> > > >I wonder if it had something to do with where the cars were
> > assigned
> > > >just prior to Amtrak, and also what diners Amtrak used on its
> San
> > > >Francisco and Denver Zephyrs in the early years.
> > > >
> > > > I believe that, by May of 1971, the only ex-Q train that ran
a
> > > > full diner regularly was the Denver Zephyr. The California
> > > > Service/Nebraska Zephyr used the Chuck Wagons as their food
> > service cars.
> > > >
> > > > sjl
> > > >
> > > >Russ Strodtz <borneo@> wrote:
> > > > It may be set by PC doing what Amtrak wanted. There were sets
> on
> > > >lists and I'm not even sure that they were able to inspect
> > everything
> > > >that they could look at. It is my understandment that other
than
> > > >the Suburban what they got was what they were told to send out
> as
> > > >Amtrak wanted them. Also heard that UP could not understand
> exactly
> > > >what they wanted and how it was figured out but they still got
> what
> > > >was wanted. Still did not get enough and had to lease all
kinds
> of
> > > >odd stuff.
> > > >
> > > >Even in recent times that are some odd things that are hard to
> > > >understand. If you can spend government money I guess that is
> > > >what will be decided.
> > > >
> > > >Russ
> > > >----- Original Message -----
> > > >From: Stephen J. Levine
> > > >To: cbq@yahoogroups.com
> > > >Sent: Saturday, 28 June, 2008 18:33
> > > >Subject: [CBQ] Why didn't Silver Inn and Silver Manor go to
> Amtrak?
> > > >
> > > >I have always been curious as to why the 1952 diners Silver
Inn
> > and
> > > >Silver Manor were not acquired by Amtrak.
> > > >
> > > >If BN was trying to hang onto the newer equipment for their
own
> > > >executive trains, the 1956 DZ Silver Tureen and Silver Chef
> were
> > > >their newest diners, followed by the ones running on the North
> > Coast
> > > >Limited. Yet these all went to Amtrak.
> > > >
> > > >If the goal was to sell Amtrak the newest equipment, then why
> did
> > > >the 1948 CZ diners go to Amtrak instead of the two diners
above
> > (the
> > > >third 1952 diner, the Silver Cuisine, did go to Amtrak.
> > > >
> > > >Was it because, with the Kansas City service not working out
> the
> > way
> > > >it was intended, these two diners became underused and thus,
by
> > > >1971, were in the best condition of any of the Budd diners? I
> was
> > > >wondering if anyone had any inside information.
> > > >
> > > >sjl
> > > >
> > > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > >
> > > >------------------------------------
> > > >
> > > >Yahoo! Groups Links
> > > >
> > > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >------------------------------------
> > > >
> > > >Yahoo! Groups Links
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > Bob Webber
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CBQ/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CBQ/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:CBQ-digest@yahoogroups.com
mailto:CBQ-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
CBQ-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|