Re: [CBQ] FW: [DRGW] Dome-Sleepers for CZ

["beaumec beaumec39@gmail.com [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>]

Bob & Hol,

Thanks for the very good disccussion about my topic of dome sleepers for CZ.

It is that I am interested in what was proposed but not actually built/done.

Part of the process...

Thanks

Alan Hegler

On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 1:52 PM, Hol Wagner holpennywagner@msn.com [CBQ] <CBQ@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

 

Bob Webber's response to the CZ dome sleeper question as posed to the D&RGW Yahoo Group has perhaps more factual information than anything that has appeared here.
 
Hol
 

---

-------- Forwarded Message --------

Subject:	Re: [DRGW] Dome-Sleepers for CZ
Date:	Mon, 01 Sep 2014 19:41:12 -0500
From:	Bob Webber rgz17@comcast.net [DRGW] <DRGW@yahoogroups.com>
Reply-To:	DRGW@yahoogroups.com
To:	DRGW@yahoogroups.com, DRGW@yahoogroups.com

 

There were several proposals, none came to fruition.  The original specifications lists a duplex car as well.    Lots of variations, but nothing serious.   The NP cars were thought about, as they were the only non-obs dome sleepers (from Budd) - but they were expensive, and there was no need for them.  48 dome seats for the sleeping car passengers were deemed enough.   What they needed was less roomettes and more rooms - reason for the 6-5s.  A 4-4-4 would have multiple issues for the consortium, not the least being more roomettes.   The 4-4-4s did operate with CZ cars on the Ak-Sar-Ben, and I have seen one consist on the CZ - but not a usual thing.

The issue, regardless of specific accommodations remained the best utilization of the space - rooms under the domes were not ideal, and the space allowed wasn't enough for the capacity they needed (or the type of accommodation).   There was also a dome-diner concept floated, that didn't pan out either.   GM was very influential on the CZ and the railroads involved, but the ToT was not very efficient in terms of utilization of space - the CZ cars were far superior.  And...when it came down to it - there was a lot of open space available for sleeping car passengers - WP saw no need for more expenditures, but then neither did the D&RGW or CB&Q - beyond the obvious need for an all room car. 

At 06:39 PM 9/1/2014, beaumec39@gmail.com [DRGW] wrote:

Gents,


Has anyone come across any mention of possible dome-sleepers for the CZ?

I know that the CB&Q-D&RGW-WP went for the 6DB-5Cpt.

I came across proposed floor plans at the CSRM.

Alan Hegler

MoPac Forever!

Bob Webber

__._,_.___

---

Posted by: beaumec <beaumec39@gmail.com>

---

Visit Your Group

• Privacy • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use

__,_._,___