BRHSLIST
[Top] [All Lists]

[CBQ] Re: TR2 Cab

To: <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [CBQ] Re: TR2 Cab
From: "kurthayek@yahoo.com [CBQ]" <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>
Date: 05 Sep 2016 15:23:35 -0700
Authentication-results: mta1006.groups.mail.bf1.yahoo.com from=yahoogroups.com; domainkeys=neutral (no sig); from=yahoogroups.com; dkim=pass (ok)
Delivered-to: archives@nauer.org
Delivered-to: mailing list CBQ@yahoogroups.com
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoogroups.com; s=echoe; t=1473114217; bh=5JLbvyVefifhB9+HkmZ/IeLwE5MMKC6YyeNRhe48k8Y=; h=To:References:In-Reply-To:From:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe:Date:Subject:Reply-To:From:Subject; b=HS5J+NVlbyp2pqajXk7z7uNNOaGe2ihTLUhIsBQXXzCPHPf35mxP1+1LcprAZjSayjaUqzF8vId4hhcz/Bb+dRaXNMepY5yeJbY13UPLnDEvUjSW/zvz9qU6eFzcVjLgj/cSSqWCjR9tFuHZzyxFK2fXM36Nk3nXhYmpBU4WKSU=
In-reply-to: <156fbf56c9d-5f5a-e42d@webprd-a11.mail.aol.com>
List-id: <CBQ.yahoogroups.com>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:CBQ-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com>
Mailing-list: list CBQ@yahoogroups.com; contact CBQ-owner@yahoogroups.com
References: <156f5e95f86-740f-b501@webprd-a46.mail.aol.com> <156fbf56c9d-5f5a-e42d@webprd-a11.mail.aol.com>
Reply-to: CBQ@yahoogroups.com
Sender: CBQ@yahoogroups.com


One needs to keep in mind that the TR2 was not two just NW2s (one minus a cab) MUed together but was designed instead as a 2000 HP two-unit locomotive with both units permanently connected. As such there were a number of differences between the two models as follows:

1.  The TR2B was not capable of independent operation (somewhat like the FTB); it had no hostler control, could not be MUed with a normal locomotive such as a NW2, and was dependent on the TR2A for operation (the TR2B may not even have had its own batteries).

2.  Since the two units were not intended to be operated separately some standard switcher features were modified or eliminated. 

3.  The two units were closely coupled with a drawbar; so closely in fact that there wasn't much needed in the way of steps between the two units. 

4.  No pilots or footboards were used on the coupled ends of the two units. 

5.  The TR2B did not have steps on the end where the cab would normally be. 

6.  The TR2A had no headlight on the rear of the cab; in its place a small light illuminated the rear platform and step area. 

7.  The lower rear cab windows on the TR2A were also eliminated; on a normal switcher these were used to see a switchman standing on the lower steps or on the footboards (as an engineer I made much use of these windows when watching for signs). On a TR2 operating in reverse the switchman would be riding on the other end of the TR2B and could be seen from the upper windows instead.

The variation in hood-top taper is dependent on when the locomotive was built; in late 1948 EMD changed from the slope-flat version to a single slope from top of hood to front of cab. The CBQ had NW2s and TR2s with both versions; TR2 CBQ 9401A&B (ex-EMD 912 demo) was built in 10-47 and had the slope-flat variation while CBQ 9402A&B-9413A&B were built in 1949 and had the single slope ahead of the cab.

When the Q sent the TR2s back to EMD for conversion into conventional switchers EMD had changed the design of the switcher cab and eliminated the curved windows on the front of the cab in favor of windows with a straight top. The TR2Bs that were converted got this newer version EMD cab. We would have to review photos to see if EMD added the lower rear cab windows on the TR2As when they were converted; of course those locos would have received a rear headlight at that time.

Hope this helps out.

Thank you

Kurt Hayek


__._,_.___

Posted by: kurthayek@yahoo.com



__,_._,___
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>