GGD Announces the North Coast Limited and the Empire Builder

quote:

Originally posted by Lima:

quote:

Originally posted by gnnpnut:

quote:

Originally posted by Pete Kruimer:
Lar,

It must be opposite day, but I think the hobby has served up tons of 18" cars forever, in every road name one can imagine, and many not imagined. We scale nut jobs have been waiting for scale passenger cars for ages. After much campaigning on the old 3R forum over the years Scott has answered the call with GGD, in spite of the many naysayers that insisted there was no market for scale passenger equipment. It is a pretty safe bet that 3rd Rail/GGD will never offer non scale anything. But for obvious reasons you won't get much support here. Not that we don't like ya, but here scale is the whale.

Larry:

The Lowey NP train has been done in 18"

Sleeper and Diner


Regards,
GNNPNUT

Without a kitchen so many of our passengers starved enroute we had to cancel the new North Coast Limited train and sell the equipment. GGD set would have had a kitchen:-)
Speaking of food, would it eat into their "Scale car" sales to also offer 18" cars for those that want them? Or would it increase production and lower the fixed costs of common parts resulting in lower prices increasing sales?

Can't speak for the market at large, 18" cars will not be eating into sales of scale length equipment for me.

I believe that you overestimate the benefit of higher production and fixed cost allocation. Off the top of my head, I think the only common parts would be the car ends (and details), trucks, and interior details (to a different platform because of the short length, hence needing a different drawing). The shell itself would be different, and would probably need a different paint mask too (assuming that the builder paints with fixed paint masks, which is another piece of tooling that is unique between shorter and full length equipment).

But, it is entirely up to Scott Mann if he feels there is a market for both 18" cars and the scale length cars. I really couldn't care less about the 18" cars, I was merely pointing out that for those who may be interested in such cars, a reasonable fascimile was already offered by MTH.

Regards,
Jerry Zeman

quote:

Originally posted by gnnpnut:

Here is a video taken by NYCJim link of my "Alaskan" in Pine Tree. Go to 6:44 on the video to see just the passenger train, the stuff in front of it is NP steam and diesel freight action.

Regards,
GNNPNUT

gnnpnut:

The view is terrific,
on the Northern Pacific.

Nice trains.

quote:

The ATSF later on in 1967 really liked the A-1-A FP-45 based loosely on the SD-45.

The FP-45 was a C-C locomotive with six traction motors.

Regards,
GNNPNUT

quote:

The GN E7's suffered from the same fate as the ATSF's fleet of E units.. poor adhesion problems on steep grades.

Eric,

Don't know how you got this information, but that was NOT the problem with E type passenger units "on steep grades". The E type passenger units where indeed A-1-A style trucks, but where equipped with 36" diameter wheel sets, thus requiring very specialized gear ratios for high passenger train speeds. That said, when the E units got down slow on a steep ascending grade, the resulting speed (RPM)of the poor DC series wound traction motor, would be quite slow (low armature RPM) drawing VERY HIGH current (Amps). The resulting high current tended to axceed the "short time ratings" for the DC traction motors, causing serious over-heating.

The F type units however, with their Blomberg two axle truck design, had 40" diameter wheel sets, and with a corrisponding passenger train speed gear ratio, could/would operate a MUCH slower train speeds on steep ascending grades, without experiencing the very high current situations experienced by E type units, since the RPM of traction motor armature was still higher than the same traction motors in an E unit. Thus, "poor adheason" had nothing to do with the problems of E type units on steep ascending grades, they where simply "burning up" the DC traction motors!

Also, as GNNPNUT pointed out, EMD SD/F/FP units where all C type, or 3 axle trucks, with ALL axles powered, and with 40" diameter wheel sets.

That's cool guys. Good comments!

The beauty and the ugly of the Internet is anything goes without expertise from the group stepping in the topic can really get goofed up. I think I heard that caugh and bull from one of the old dudes in my club.

Interesting stuff and thanks for commenting.

Did the NP have wter tanks in their baggage cars so to provide more H2O for the steam generators?

Yes, they were called "water / baggage" cars.

 

Did GN have like bag/H2O cars.  They both had to deal with the same climate.

Yup.  the '47 EB at least.

It's possible the GN had baggage/water cars, but I've never heard it mentioned before, especially in GNRHS Reference Sheets 358 and 360 which discuss the GN Heater Cars.  According to Reference Sheet 358 Table 4, the E7's each had two Vapor-OK 4625 steam generators capable of 2500 lb/hr each. The E7 water tanks were 1600 gallons. The 1947 EB had 12 cars, requiring about 300 lb/hr of steam each in severe cold conditions. 3600 lb/hr of steam equates to 432 gal/hour of water. So, the combined water capacity of two E7's, at 3200 gallons, could theoretically supply the train for 7.4 hours. Extra water may have been necessary if servicing stop intervals exceeded that time.

 

Typically, GN's F3/F7 passenger A units had a single Vapor-OK 4740 steam generator capable of 4500 lb/hr, but only carried 600 gallons of water. The B units had a Vapor-OK 4530 capable of 3000 lb/hr, and had 2180 gallon water capacity.  The B units carried 600 gallons in a tank below the unit floor next to the fuel tank (i.e. same as the A units), and the rest was in auxiliary tanks mounted higher in the carbody such that it could feed water by gravity to its lower tank, or to that of an A unit it was coupled to.  The A units only had water transfer hoses on the rear end, not on the cab end, so it was not possible to transfer water to an A unit if it was coupled "elephant style".

 

After the Stevens Pass electrification ended in 1956, GN Heater Cars 1-7 were reassigned across the system and were occasionally used to provide steam when a locomotive's steam generator was inoperative, or when the train required more steam because of extra length and/or severe conditions. GN built two additional heater cars, 8 and 9, from express boxcars for this purpose. These cars lasted well into a 1960's, and several are still around for tourist and excursion service.

 

When the GN purchased SDP40 and SDP45 units, they were each equipped with single OK-4740 steam generator and a 2200 gallon tank (2750 gal on the SDP-45). So, while a pair of these units had as much horsepower as an A-B-B-A set of F units, steam capacity was considerably less. For that reason, GN built Heater Cars 10 through 19 from retired B units.  These cars had dual 4500 lb/hr steam generators and, more importantly, carried nearly 12000 gallons of water. This capacity could adequately heat the Empire Builder and Western Star in the worst winter conditions, even allowing for a steam generator failure en route.

Were these heater cars used on the Amtrak EB especially after the BN placed a ban on the SDP40F's?

Yes, GN Heater Cars #10 through #15 became Amtrak 660 - 665 respectively. When the Empire Builder received F40PH locos but still had the heritage steam-heated passenger cars, these units and some ex-CB&Q E8/9 units provided train heat. One of Rick Wright's photo essays on the Real Trains forum had several photos of this.

Finally I remember to grab some photos of the Mac Shops dome coach.

 

This was a swap meet find along with the 11 car consist; nice set really especially considering the era it was built.

 

 

 

 

 

Why did the GN order full domes while the NP did not.  I thought the NP was basicly OWNED bt GN?

NP didn't want any full length domes?

Seeing that only a few roads had full domes,(ATSF, GN, Milw and SP[almost a full dome] come to mind) possibly because dome seats were essentially non-revenue seats?

 

Rusty

The "short" domes on GN were dome coaches only. The full length View series dome lounge cars were added to the Empire Builder to provide spacious lounge service to the sleeping car passengers, as well as dome seats for them. (So they didn't have to mingle with the "riffraff" in coach .) Prior to this, lounge service for first class passengers was in the observation cars and was frequently insufficient.

 

Northern Pacific domes included both dome coaches and dome 4-4-4 sleepers. So, their first class passengers did have dome seating available and they didn't need the full length domes. (NP was probably also aware that the full length domes were higher-maintenance cars, heavy cars - riding on special 6-wheel trucks and having their own mechanical air conditioning equipment.)

 

In Great Northern Pictorial Volume III, author John Strauss (who was a travelling passenger representative for many years on the Empire Builder) discusses some of the issues GN experienced with the full-length dome cars in their early years of service. Nevertheless, all of the GN full domes survived into the Amtrak and BN era. Glacier View is currently in the BNSF business car fleet, and I believe Amtrak still has one. 

I remember riding the Amtrak EB, and the sleeper ahead of mine was a dome-sleeper.  It did not have a SILVER name, so my guess it was an ex-NP dome.  Really nice; dome was in great shape!

TO SCOTT MANN..........

 

Hey Scott, if you have the time, could you jump in on this thread and provide some insights on both the planned NP and GN runs?  Thanks.  Jim

 

I traded with a guy that likes hooter whistles, and wanted that in his UP 3985. 

 

 

I for one would like to have a full GN EB set with A-A E-7s ... although short-lived in actual service they really looked "cool" at the front of those consists.

And although not good for grades they could really get up and step lively on the flatlands.

I thought the star on a baggage car ment there was a place for a human being in the car, like a very small desk office. 

Chatted with Scott...at this juncture, he indicated, "Bob Heil and Friends are working on the correct consist for the NP and GN cars. I don't know enough about them to comment yet". I am sure Scott will keep us posted.

 

As for me, I would much prefer the Loewy scheme for the NP and the Glacier Park colors for the GN. 

 

As an aside, it would be really great to see Scott do a model of the GN business car (A11) which is still in use and stored in a museum farther north (can't remember the name at the moment).

Often with a toilet as well. Messengers in baggage cars enroute, like RPO employees, were not allowed to leave their car to attend to personal needs elsewhere in the train. Cars with assigned messengers carried high value stuff.

 

Starred B&O baggage cars were equipped that way. They also had a small sink and water tank in a corner inside (like in a caboose) as well as a large Monel metal cabinet with desk, locking doors and drawers at the center of the car on one side. Oh yes, maybe a stool or chair too.

 

 

Here are some pic's of the Great Northern Business Car, no. A11:

Another one bites the dust ... been told for years the star meant water/baggage and now I know it's messenger facilities inside; thanks!

Scott Mann....over three months since the last post on this thread.  We would really appreciate you jumping in and letting us know which paint schemes you will produce for the NP and GN sets (hopefully the Loewy scheme for the NP and the Glacier Park colors for the GN).  ....and when we might expect to see some product updates.  Thanks.  Jim

I hope they make the Christmas tree NCL.  I think that livery is under rated, vs RL!