Great information guys, thanks. I may have to get at least one pair of the
Intermountain gray backs!
--- In CBQ@yahoogroups.com, John Manion <railbass@...> wrote:
>
> I specialize in modeling diesels in HO for D&RGW, and some for CB&Q, so I
> have done quite a lot of research on them, especially the F units. My
> sources have been Diesel Era's *The Revolutionary Diesel - EMC's FT *(1994),
> Daniel Mulhearn/John Taibi *General Motors' F Units *(1982), Jeff Wilson's *F
> Units - The Diesels That Did It *(2000), plus numerous articles from *Trains,
> Model Railroader, *and other rail magazines.
>
> When GM introduced the FT in 1939 with the test run of #103 across the
> nation's railroads and when production FTs were first delivered in 1941,
> most were drawbar-connected A-B units. The original EMC thinking was that
> the FTs would be operated as 2 or 4-unit sets and that an A-B set would
> always be operated together. The A-B set would be semi-permanently coupled
> together with a drawbar. Most railroads bought A-B-B-A sets, usually
> numbered with the same number for the entire set with each A or B unit
> numbered with an A, B, C, or D. This varied for several roads, and the
> D&RGW even numbered units at one point early in their careers with a very
> confusing 540 1/4, 540 2/4, etc. system. The connection and numbering of FT
> units depended on the individual road. Some roads, such as AT&SF, ordered
> the original FTs with couplers on each unit. Most roads dropped the
> drawbars not long after delivery and installed couplers to provide more
> flexibility. If a B unit needed major maintenance, you would not lose use
> of an A unit simply because it was connected to the B unit. This thinking
> soon became prevalent with the FTs and other F series, so that the drawbar
> was changed to couplers to provide more flexibility. Roads also found that
> keeping F units in A-B or A-B-B-A consists was impractical, as it was easier
> to couple an F unit into what other diesel units were available. In the
> 1950s, F units were being run with other F unit series and GPs and SDs.
> Keeping a full A-B-B-A set as one unit looked nice, but it impacted on the
> flexibility needed to utilize the MU concept of the diesel that made it so
> much more efficient than the steam locomotive.
>
> With the original order for FTs, the Q asked for them to be all equipped
> with couplers. EMD's Dick Dilworth and D.H. Queeny argued that the A-B
> units should be equipped with drawbars because couplers caused poor riding,
> abnormal wheel and diaphragm wear, and reduced the amount of water carried
> for the steam generator system. When the AT&SF ordered all their FTs with
> couplers, EMD had to do some reengineering to make a coupler that would fit
> between A and B units with the short clearance between the traction motors
> of adjacent units. FTs were designed with truck wheelbases of 27'6" for
> the A unit and 26'6" for the B unit. The B unit had a long overhang behind
> the rear truck, but the front truck next to the A unit was right at the end
> of the unit. Later F units, beginning with the F2, had 30'0" truck
> wheelbases with the trucks well inside the body to allow couplers to be
> mounted. Drawbars were not standard for any series after the FT. The Q
> bought these initial arguments but soon made the decision during
> construction to delete the steam generators and use the FTs only for freight
> service. By late 1951, only 11 four-unit sets of the original FT remained
> together, as 10 A-B sets had been coupled to F2As. The Q then began
> equipping them with couplers over a long period of time. D&RGW did the same
> thing over the 1950s, and even #5481, an FT which was badly damaged in a
> wreck in 1950, was rebuilt with an F7 carbody, but it still had a drawbar to
> connect to its B unit.
>
> With the exception of the AT&SF and a few other customers, FT A-B sets came
> with drawbars when delivered, as they were designed and built that way.
> Each road gradually changed to couplers, and most FTs were scrapped or
> traded in for second generation diesels in the 1960s, having all couplers by
> that time. I am not aware of any FTs surviving to the 1960s with drawbars,
> although there may have been some exceptions, as changing the drawbars for
> couplers was quite an effort and expense.
>
> By the time the F2 and F3 were introduced after the war, EMD had learned
> that drawbars were a handicap and had lengthened the carbodies, allowing an
> overhang for couplers to be mounted in draft gear to the frame and other
> improved technology. EMD had quickly learned that operation in two and
> four unit sets of F diesels was not a reasonable option for most railroads.
>
> Best way to determine if drawbars continued on an FT is to look at a photo,
> preferably a side view showing the connection between A and B units. You
> may also be able to see by the close connection between A and B in a photo,
> but that is not the best way to tell. The easiest way to tell is to see FT
> units coupled to other types of units - F or GP/SD - as the D&RGW frequently
> did into the 1950s and later.
> - John Manion
>
> On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 2:58 PM, Supplement Less
> <supplementless@...>wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Were the FT's ever broken down into single units or just AB sets? I know
> > they started out with drawbars and there were some sets broken up and
> > matched with F2's.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> [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:
CBQ-digest@yahoogroups.com
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/
|