The 1969 UP Centennial "Report to Shippers" has some photos of UP GSC flats
handling containers in what I presumes to be the Long Beach Harbor facility.
One photo shows the end of UP 258600, one of the semi-permanently coupled sets
of twin 53'6'' flats. The focus of the photo was to high-light the container
tie-downs, but it also shows stencilling that the cars could handle 20-,
24-,30-,35- and 40-foot containers on each car. The lettering on each set is
also interesting. Reading left to right, one car has the set number and data,
the other has "Cushion Load", Union Pacific and the F 70-13 class markings.
Another Photo shows GSC 53' 6'' UP 58527, again with EOC cushioning with two
20-foot containers. If containers of of pineapples headed for Chicago entered
the country via Long Beach, It is reasonable that UP would use appropriate
equipment to move them east. While the 1969 Report to Shippers showed newer
series, the January 1967 ORER lists 22 sets in the 258050-258064, 258075,
258085, 258100-258104 and 258120-258122 number series. While the Q would
readily accept such cars in interchange, it is not likely they would allow an
uneditted photo of them in a company report.
Jim Sandrin
Another interesting aspect of this traffic was related by the late Bob
Landregan. As you noted, the Q built a prototype "underslung" unit to power
refrigerated containers. This experiment did not show up in the Reefer
Bulletin (#12) as it was never completed. According to Uncle Bob, the suitable
power unit was not available to civilian industrial applications because the
production of them was dedicated to military use in Viet Nam at that time (late
1960s).
--- In CBQ@yahoogroups.com, "thommack" <thommack@...> wrote:
>
> Here is an update to my original post. The following information is based on
> a CB&Q (not BRHS) Burlington Bulletin I just obtained, Issue Number 35,
> September-October 1967 ("MEAT PROGRESS" on cover):
>
> 1. The same photo in the 1967 Annual Report is on page 8 of this BB. The
> caption reads: "Sixty containers, largest containerized shipment ever to
> arrive in Chicago from Japan, was received recently in Cicero yards. The
> aluminum containers, which carried radios, rape recorders and other
> electronic parts and equipment, we carried aboard special articulated flat
> cars after being unloaded from a container ship at Los Angeles."
>
> This caption makes it sound like this may have been a special shipment. Also,
> the fact that these are "special articulated flat cars" will hopefully give a
> clue as to whose cars these were. From the photo it is clear these are
> two-car sets made up of GSC flat cars. Although the caption uses the term
> "articulated", I doubt these are really articulated sets (which implies one
> center truck shared by two cars). My guess is that they are draw-bar
> permanently coupled sets. If we do the math, 60 containers would have require
> 15 of the two-car articulated flat car sets. So whoever's cars these are,
> they would have needed to have a number of these two-car sets on their
> roster. Since one car still has two 20' containers on it, I would say these
> are the longer GSC flats, 55-60 ft long.
>
> My guess is that these were UP flat cars. According to the UP Color Guide
> Volume 2 Page 49 The UP used 53'-6" class F-70-5 cars to make 25 110'
> articulated car sets designated class F-70-13 in 1964. The photo is of a
> mineral red car set. In Volume 1 on page 52 is a photo of a two-car set U.P.
> 258164 designed for containers. Total car length was 114'-8". UP owned ten of
> these cars and later acquired 170 more with a total length of 115'-10". These
> cars were in yellow and had predominate UP reporting marks/number on the car
> ends. The reason why I bring this up is the photo in the BB at Cicero has no
> visible car end reporting marks. This may have been the PR department
> airbrushing out the UP info so as not to detract from the CB&Q or it may be
> another indicator of car owner/type because many UP flat cars shown in the
> Color Guides, both mineral red and yellow, do not have any reporting marks on
> the car ends.
>
> 2. This BB also has an article in it on Meat Transport that has info on new
> container cars for 24' reefer containers. The photo shows a TTX 89' flat that
> was outfitted with an "underslung" "64-HP, three-cylinder, two-cycle diesel
> engine". According to the article the diesel engines were "used successfully
> on combat and construction vehicles in Viet Nam." The meat containers were
> loaded at Armour in St. Paul (three 24' containers per car) and shipped to
> Alameda, CA "where they are loaded on a Matson freighter for the Hawaiian
> Islands." The article said a second car was being retrofitted at Havelock and
> if successful, 18 more "Underslungs" would be built.
>
> Anyone know if this was successful? Also, I am curious about the route to
> Alameda. Would the cars have gone all the way to Chicago and then to
> California, or would these have possibly gone to Savanna and then the Pea
> Vine to Galesburg? These were 89' cars, so I don't know if the Pea Vine
> regularly handled that length.
>
> Tom Mack
> Cincinnati, OH
>
>
> --- In CBQ@yahoogroups.com, "thommack" <thommack@> wrote:
> >
> > I was looking through my 1967 CB&Q Annual Report (released May, 1968)and
> > ran across a very interesting photo on page 4. It shows a "down on" view of
> > apparently shot from some elevated vantage point of the container
> > operations at Cicero yard. Being unloaded from a flat car is a Mitsui
> > O.S.K. Lines 20' container that also has a large "AIWA-SELECTRON" sign
> > attached to the container ribs. The caption photo says "Container loads of
> > Japanese electronic wares are unloaded at Cicero yard, on Chicago's western
> > limits."
> >
> > Here are some interesting observations and a question:
> >
> > 1. The 20' containers are not on 89' container flats. There are two of them
> > each on GSC flat cars (clearly identified by the wooden deck pattern).
> > Anyone know what length and whose GSC flat cars would have been modified
> > for twin 20' container carrying in 1967? Were these actually CB&Q flats?
> >
> > 2. The containers are being unloaded using an old Whiting gantry crane. The
> > crane is an old rail mounted gantry crane apparently already at Cicero. It
> > is not a rubber tired gantry crane like you usually think of for containers
> > and piggyback, and which the Q actually purchased for Cicero in 1965 (a
> > 171,400 pound capacity LeTorneau Series ST-40 pictured on page 18 of the
> > 1965 Annual Report). The container is being lifted by four cables, one
> > cable hooked at each top corner of the container, not by some actual
> > container lifting device like is used today.
> >
> > 3. Does anyone know if these containers were offloaded anywhere else other
> > than Cicero? e.g. Might they have gone to the Twin Cities for offload
> > there, or was container traffic pretty much between the west coast and
> > Chicago only?
> >
> > Hope this gets some lively discussion going!
> >
> > Tom Mack
> > Cincinnati, OH
> >
>
------------------------------------
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/
|