I was running a set of heavyweight passenger cars tonight and this question never hit me. The set does not have an observation or tail car. Did they ever have a caboose?
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
Here is an observation car with a big heavyweight caboose on the back! 
They do, occasionally, on Arkansas and Missouri RR excursions. It's an extra cost option to ride in the caboose, though.
Mitch
1. PRR did have some cabooses for a while on some Mail and Express trains.
2. The Texas Mexican did have a caboose for the short time the Tex Mex Express ran between Corpus Christi and Laredo, TX in the mid 1980's. It was used as a baggage car. The train used heavy wright passenger cars....
3. On some mixed trains.
4. On some pre-Amtrak Auto Trains?
Study what train you want to model, then go from there.
Except for some very unusual circumstance such as mixed-train service or tourist operation, no, American passenger trains did not and do not have a caboose in the consist. Many First Class passenger trains did have a Conductor's desk somewhere in the train and many had/have dormitory cars (at the head-end) for train staff.
hokie71 posted:I was running a set of heavyweight passenger cars tonight and this question never hit me. The set does not have an observation or tail car. Did they ever have a caboose?
Many secondary trains operated without an observation car. The last car would be, well, the last car. It could be a coach, sleeper, diner, lounge, even a baggage car.
The caboose is primarily the "office" for a freight train conductor and where the rear end brakeman can monitor the train from. While sometimes used on some mail or express trains, passenger trains in the pre-tourist railroad days did not have a caboose.
There's always a spot somewhere on a passenger train that the conductor can claim as his "office."
Rusty
Most passenger trains in the heavy weight era did not even include an observation or tail car in the consist. Long distance name trains ( ei: 20th Century Limited, Broadway Limited, Royal Blue, Super Chief, etc. ) of that era usually did have an observation car in the consist. Railroads also would occasionally tack one of their heavy weight business cars ( usually a heavy weight observation car ) onto the rear of a passenger train.
A caboose at the end of a common carrier passenger train ( pre - AMTRAK and certainly during AMTRAK ) would have been rare as hens teeth, however, in the world of railroading I would not be surprised if somewhere it may have happened once or twice for some very odd reason.
As stated by Dominic M., earlier in this thread, the PRR included a caboose on the end of mail and express trains for a period of time. These cabooses were fitted with high speed passenger trucks. I've also read that the B&O also used a caboose periodically on mail and express train out of Jersey City.
On a normal passenger train I know of no cabooses used at the end of the train. But never say never it could have happened for some reason. Normally...no.
I also know of situations like early circus trains, where the circus cars were pulled, many times by the RR they were on at the time, and a caboose from that RR was on the tail end, coupled to the circus Pullman cars that they owned.
Jeff B. Haertlein posted:On a normal passenger train I know of no cabooses used at the end of the train. But never say never it could have happened for some reason. Normally...no.
Correct. Also, remember that caboose trucks were NOT designed for passenger train speeds, i.e. 60 to 100+ MPH.
Let's take a look at what a caboose is. A caboose has three primary purposes:
- It carries markers, indicating the rear of the train, which is important. Other trains having timetable authority, a train order, or a track warrant, which authorize one train to proceed on the Main Track after the passage of a specific other train, must know that the entire train has passed, and the markers indicate that. Additionally, markers identify the rear of a preceding train to any other train approaching it from the rear.
- It is a place from which to observe the train as it proceeds, and for the Flagman to alight from, when required to provide flag protection to the rear of the train.
- It is an office for the Conductor, and a bunk car for use when needed and when permitted.
How many of these purposes can be fulfilled when the rear car is an occupied passenger car?
- Markers can be displayed on the rear car.
- The Flagman or another Train Crew member can observe the train on curves while standing in the vestibule with the upper Dutch door open. The flagging equipment can be stored in the rear vestibule and the Flagman can alight and later re-board, when flag protection to the rear is required.
- The Conductor can do his paper work, if there is an unoccupied seat or Pullman space anywhere on the train.
How does having an unoccupied passenger car as the rear car affect those purposes? (Unoccupied passenger car: a "blind" car without vestibules, such as a baggage car, or an express reefer or boxcar; or, a passenger car to which access by the train crew is not possible, such as a locked private car)
- Markers can be displayed on the rear car.
- The Flagman cannot observe the train from an unoccupied car, nor use it when flagging is required.
- The Conductor must do paper work in another car, which was actually the normal practice. Most passenger Conductors preferred to station themselves in the most comfortable space available to them, usually not at the rear of the train.
If there are only one or two unoccupied passenger cars on the rear -- an observation car without a vestibule, for example -- the Train Crew could still perform required duties from the vestibule-equipped passenger car coupled ahead of the unoccupied car(s). Use of a caboose would be a management decision if the ability of the crew to provide flag protection to the rear is seriously impaired by the number of unoccupied cars on the rear (such as the PRR mail trains which were typically composed entirely of unoccupied passenger cars). Also Brakeman and Conductor union agreements may have required it on certain railroads. Routine use of a caboose at the rear of a passenger train would otherwise be an impediment. A major financial and time-consuming complication would be the requirement to have Car Inspectors position the air brake control valve graduated release cap on every car in the train to the Freight position, unless the caboose was equipped with air brake equipment that allowed for graduated release of the brakes.
Use of a caboose at the rear of a passenger train was a business and safety decision, based on conditions described above.
By the same token some RRs did put passenger car trucks under cabooses, better ride etc, C&NW was one of them.
I appreciate all the interesting information provided. Many items I never considered in asking the question so a lot of learning for me on this one. Thanks to all.
Jeff B. Haertlein posted:By the same token some RRs did put passenger car trucks under cabooses, better ride etc, C&NW was one of them.
And the Burlington had what could be considered as wood beam passenger trucks under their wood-sided waycars. That doesn't mean they were used in general passenger service.
Rusty
Exactly. THey were used on the C&NW for instance for giving the crews a better ride. ANd it did!
Dominic Mazoch posted:1. PRR did have some cabooses for a while on some Mail and Express trains.
trumptrain posted:As stated by Dominic M., earlier in this thread, the PRR included a caboose on the end of mail and express trains for a period of time. These cabooses were fitted with high speed passenger trucks.
The one photo I've seen of these cabins had Railroad Express Agency markings and was at the end of an express train.
Had to edit and delete the wanderings from keeping this thread about the prototype....remember, this is the real trains category!!!
A full M&E train is an interesting train. It is a train full of equipment used in passenger service. But withoutva rider coach, is it a passenger train? Guess the railroads could give it first class rights.
SP usually placed the Ogden to Bay Area rider coach in the middle of trains 21-22 Mail. But SP sometimes placedca second coach at the end of the train for the train cree
Jeff B. Haertlein posted:Exactly. THey were used on the C&NW for instance for giving the crews a better ride. ANd it did!
Providing a "better ride" is one thing, but assigning a caboose to passenger train service, with speeds upwards of 80, 90, and 100 MPH is a whole different story!
Even those "special" N5 Cabin Cars on the PRR that were assigned to Railway Express Agency express train service (do to the lack of rider coaches for reared crews) , were modified for higher speed service (even having train line steam conduits for steam heat inside), but still under 100 MPH.
Ok, I have a picture of page 102 of the book THE PENNSY IN CHICAGO. it shows a passenger train, unamed, number 70, with a caboose on the end leaving Union Station From the caption:
....Here, on June 6, 1964, seen from an open window in Harrison Street Tower, the rear of each train passes. Work rules rrquire the PRR cabin on the rear of 70, while passengers with destinations in the Praire State of Gateway City may enjoy a meal in the heavyweight diner, or in the comfort of a parlor seat in the trailing lightweight car...
Never say never......
Hot Water posted:Jeff B. Haertlein posted:Exactly. THey were used on the C&NW for instance for giving the crews a better ride. ANd it did!
Providing a "better ride" is one thing, but assigning a caboose to passenger train service, with speeds upwards of 80, 90, and 100 MPH is a whole different story!
Even those "special" N5 Cabin Cars on the PRR that were assigned to Railway Express Agency express train service (do to the lack of rider coaches for reared crews) , were modified for higher speed service (even having train line steam conduits for steam heat inside), but still under 100 MPH.
Only pointing out that there were caboses with passenger car trucks, no implication they were ON passenger trains!
The only regular employment of cabooses on passenger trains was on "MAIN" trains, or troop trains. Typically during WW II they were handled by freight locomotives such as 2-8-2's and 2-10-2's, to cite some. Suspect the employment of cabooses in this role was due to the entirety of the train being under the command of the senior military officer on the train. The railroad supervised the movement of the train with professional railroaders in the caboose.
Regarding C&NW and CB&Q waycars riding on passenger trucks, they were 19th century passenger trucks, not suitable for high speed 20th century passenger trains. But then again, many a hogger had Burlington freight trains running in the 60-70 mph range!
That is right, many of those passenger trucks could have been wood beam trucks. For anyone interested, visit this website, click on equipment, then cabooses, then scroll down to the C&NW caboose and look at the trucks I speak of. www.midcontinent.org
hokie71 posted:I was running a set of heavyweight passenger cars tonight and this question never hit me. The set does not have an observation or tail car. Did they ever have a caboose?
eerrrr,uuum....no
Not heavyweight passenger cars, but in an unusual arrangement the C&O ran TOFC's on some of their mainline passenger trains in the late 1950's. When even a single TOFC was added to the end of the consist apparently a caboose was required.
The TOFC's ran between Staunton, VA and Charleston, WVA and apparently the thought behind this was the trailer traffic would add revenue to the declining passenger trains. This arrangement lasted only a few years and ended about the time TrailerTrain came into existence.
I can't post a picture of this because of the copyright rules and there isn't a direct link to the pictures, so go to the C&O Historical Society archive website:
Enter piggyback in the search box and it should return a number of pictures. Scroll down to find the pictures showing the caboose on the end of the passenger train.
Ken
Late in the passenger/M&E era, TOFC and COFC were built ot converted for passenger service. ATSF SAN FRANCISCO CHIEF could have passenger COFC in its head end during this time.
Chas posted:Here is an observation car with a big heavyweight caboose on the back!
She ain't dat "heavyweight"! Chances are good it's the dress of the period.
Dominic Mazoch posted:A full M&E train is an interesting train. It is a train full of equipment used in passenger service. But withoutva rider coach, is it a passenger train? Guess the railroads could give it first class rights.
SP usually placed the Ogden to Bay Area rider coach in the middle of trains 21-22 Mail. But SP sometimes placedca second coach at the end of the train for the train cree
M&E trains usually were scheduled as first class trains. I 've seen a multitude of employee timetables and never an exception to that.
With or without a rider coach, an M&E train was not a passenger train. A typical definition in railroad rule books was "PASSENGER TRAIN - A train carrying passengers."
When I worked for the NYC, I sometimes found it convenient to ride on M&E trains and my pass was endorsed good on M&E trains. I was not considered to be a passenger for the purposes of the operating rules. The timetables on the NYC had a footnote for each M&E train saying "does not carry passengers."
A mixed train authorized to carry revenue passengers was a passenger train, even if the passengers rode in the caboose. I've done that also. It was on an SP branch line mixed train that rarely saw a passenger.
I rode in a caboose that was behind a coach. Locomotive was an SP Mogul, destined to star in the movie "Oklahoma!"
Our SP Meadowlark Solarian Car doesn't have a rear deck to stand on. SP added controls for whistle and brakes so it could be manned in a reverse move inside the back door. I would imagine that the only manned reverse move would be at both ends of the run when they wyed the Lark trains for there return trip, or a yard move. I can see a Fireman manning a station in a occupied first class car though.
CSX FAN posted:Our SP Meadowlark Solarian Car doesn't have a rear deck to stand on. SP added controls for whistle and brakes so it could be manned in a reverse move inside the back door. I would imagine that the only manned reverse move would be at both ends of the run when they wyed the Lark trains for there return trip, or a yard move. I can see a Fireman manning a station in a occupied first class car though.
A "Fireman"? Maybe a Trainman or Brakeman, but the Fireman would be on the locomotive.
An interesting bit of trivia on this idea concerns the East Broad Top, narrow gauge in Pennsylvania. they ran until about 1956 with a stable of 6 mikados mostly hauling coal and gannister rock for bricks.
Anyway, apparently their caboose did not ride nearly as well as passenger cars. Therefore the conductors/crews on most freights after passenger service ended, would use a passenger car on their trains. There would be a 20 or so car coal train with a passenger car on the end for the crew. I don't think they were technically mixed trains either, just freights. I would imagine they might handle a passenger if requested.
mlaughlinnyc posted:When I worked for the NYC, I sometimes found it convenient to ride on M&E trains and my pass was endorsed good on M&E trains.
Do you recall whether the train crews on NYC mail and express trains wore passenger uniforms and whether they were paid the freight or passenger rate of pay?
Same question would apply to anyone who has first hand knowledge of PRR M&E trains.
Number 90 posted:mlaughlinnyc posted:When I worked for the NYC, I sometimes found it convenient to ride on M&E trains and my pass was endorsed good on M&E trains.Do you recall whether the train crews on NYC mail and express trains wore passenger uniforms and whether they were paid the freight or passenger rate of pay?
Same question would apply to anyone who has first hand knowledge of PRR M&E trains.
In the day, the ENTIRE NYC and the ENTIRE PRR EACH were a division of the REA!
Number 90: The rate of pay for the railroad crew could change from day to day for the same train. If there was a boxcar or flatcar that was originally a freight car, and was converted to passenger service, pay would go from passenger to freight even if there was only one converted car in the train. This is what I have read. I think ATSF did convert some boxvars to M&E/headend service. PRR had hundreds of such boxcars.
It's hard to recall, but I feel pretty sure they di not. The exception would be for acrewman who worked an M&E train in one direction and passenger in the other and would for his own convenience wear the unirofm on the M&E train. But I'm sure it was required only for those train employees whose dities brought them in contact with pasengers.
Dominic Mazoch posted:Number 90 posted:mlaughlinnyc posted:When I worked for the NYC, I sometimes found it convenient to ride on M&E trains and my pass was endorsed good on M&E trains.Do you recall whether the train crews on NYC mail and express trains wore passenger uniforms and whether they were paid the freight or passenger rate of pay?
Same question would apply to anyone who has first hand knowledge of PRR M&E trains.
In the day, the ENTIRE NYC and the ENTIRE PRR EACH were a division of the REA!
Didn't matter. REA never operated trains and had no influence on the crews. REA employees only loaded the cars and sometimes rode as express messengers.
Dominic Mazoch posted:Number 90: The rate of pay for the railroad crew could change from day to day for the same train. If there was a boxcar or flatcar that was originally a freight car, and was converted to passenger service, pay would go from passenger to freight even if there was only one converted car in the train. This is what I have read. I think ATSF did convert some boxvars to M&E/headend service. PRR had hundreds of such boxcars.
After 20 years in the business in the 60's and 70's, that idea makes no sense to me. When a freight car was converted for use in passenger baggage or express service, it became a passenger train car. The car would have been renumbered and there would have been no way for a crew to rigorously determine the origin of any car in a train , which would have been necessary at the end of a trip when they filled out their timeslips.
In the book, THE GHOST TRAINS OF THE SOUTHERN PACIFIC, 21-22 MAIL, there is a discussion about converted freight cars. SP, seems they kept a roster of converted cars in their paperwork for the train crew, and mention claiming freight pay rates for even one conversion car in the train. Now was this nationwide? Just on SP? A union contract provision for the Overland Route? Book does not say.
Dominic Mazoch posted:Late in the passenger/M&E era, TOFC and COFC were built ot converted for passenger service. ATSF SAN FRANCISCO CHIEF could have passenger COFC in its head end during this time.
In the late 90s Amtrak ran some kind of express in express boxcars (passenger car type trucks) on the rear end of the Capitol:
I took the pic a mile east of Meyersdale. That is the old Western Maryland bridge.
Attachments
geysergazer posted:In the late 90s Amtrak ran some kind of express in express boxcars (passenger car type trucks) on the rear end of the Capitol:
Mail runs, IIRC. Last I heard, Amtrak was still running mail in express boxcars on the NE Corridor DC-NYC.
Mitch
Dominic Mazoch posted:In the book, THE GHOST TRAINS OF THE SOUTHERN PACIFIC, 21-22 MAIL, there is a discussion about converted freight cars. SP, seems they kept a roster of converted cars in their paperwork for the train crew, and mention claiming freight pay rates for even one conversion car in the train. Now was this nationwide? Just on SP? A union contract provision for the Overland Route? Book does not say.
That sounds very much like a local contract interpretation imposed by a pro-union arbitrator, not uncommon in the 30's and 40's. Many of the onerous work rules that we knew in the 50's and 60's were the result of arbitration cases by the National Labor Adjustment board which was give authority to arbitrate work rules disputes. A majority of the arbitrators were appointed under the Roosevelt administration which was very unfriendly to management.
