|
The problem is the timing. The Pullman Palace Car Co. had numbered as well as named cars. (Actually, so did Pullman itself - and not just the Tourist cars of the late30s and 40s). The question is, did the cars have the numbers assigned from the Factory, or at a later date. Usually, numbers are applied to cars when purchased (note no number shows on the photos). OTOH, numbers were also applied as accounting and/or computing aids (for instance, the MP applied numbers to all their named cars in the 50s (or 60s - doesn't matter to this discussion) as a computer aid. The first IBM punched card tabulating equipment was brought into service in the 1880s, but I doubt the CB&Q used them that early. And the use of BURLINGTON as opposed to PULLMAN isn't definitive either - Pullman put railroad names on their cars as early as the 1880s. This was especially true for the special trains of the era (the Q train in question was NOT the only "special" 5 car train of the period). The Pennsylvania Limited, Royal Blue, Sunset Limited, etc. all had cars that were owned by Pullman Palace Car but were lettered for the railroads. However, in those cases, there was a "PULLMAN" somewhere on the car side. The bottom line may well be, well, the bottom line. Follow the money. Who operated the Library baggage? With the configuration, it could have been either. Even though the Lot book indicates the Chair & Coach were owned by PPC - they were more likely owned by the Q (although, there were a number of discrepancies to "normal" practice). Special trains were a given at the various Expositions and Fairs, and it would still make sense for PPC & CB&Q to display them (just as they did the Zephyr in 1934). It could well be a situation not unlike the PRR locomotive labeled "American's Railroads" at the New York fair in 1939 - no official ownership change, but the equipment was displayed as a non-railroad asset. I am certain that, by the time the cars received CB&Q numbers, they were CB&Q equipment. When, exactly that occurred is not obvious. Note that when the 1899 cars (of very similar description) were built, they indicate CB&Q ownership. AND, though the chairs & coaches are the same CB&Q class, they were not the same Pullman Plan number. That may not mean much, but those 1897 cars are unique in a variety of ways. At 12:32 PM 2/13/2012, you wrote: Gents Thanks again for the information. On the subject of books, last night I found a non-Google copy of The Story of the Pullman Car written in 1917 at http://www.archive.org/details/storyofpullmancahusb I've also found an Arthur Dubin article on the Limited in "Trains" of August 1970. However, there is no indication in the article as to ownership. The reason I thought that St Paul, Alma and Winonna (together with Minneapolis, Maiden Rock and Savanna) were owned by Burlington as they had CB&Q numbers ( 500, 366, 402, 501, 401, 369) in Bill Glick's Roster, as did Wisconsin (#304") Would the allocation of a number guarantee that it was owned by the Burlington or is that another fraught generalisation? Piecing together the information would suggest that all the cars may have been owned originally by Pullman, but the non-sleepers were later sold to Burlington. Rupert ----- Original Message -----
__._,_.___
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 __,_._,___ |