I have never seen a photo of an ATSF diesel powered passenger train pulled by anything other than the streamlined cab units. Was any newer type ever used, or did they stick with the EMDs and ALCOs until AMTRAK?
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
FP45's on the Super Chief-EL Capitan and GE U30CG's on #23-24.
Originally Posted by marker:
FP45's on the Super Chief-EL Capitan and GE U30CG's on #23-24.
That's what 'm looking for. Thanks a lot, guys! 
The TX CHIEF got U28/30CG's.
ATSF did have some steam boiler equipped GP7 or 9's for switching and local service.
Did for some road switcher Alcos.
Some F units were dual service. They were blue and had steam equipment for passenger.
F45's were sometimes used with FP45's or a steam equipped F aas passenger power. Did some/all F45 have "pass through" passenger equipment?
How about the Alco DL-109. A reference I used (Wikipedia) states that they actually only had 1 DL-107. # 50. MTH called it a DL-109. The one I have is numbered 52. The new one is numbered 50.
Alan
Did some/all F45 have "pass through" passenger equipment?
Yes, the last twenty (original road numbers 1920-1939) had pass-through steam lines. A few had Automatic Train Stop (ATS) equipment so they were capable of running in the lead.
Originally Posted by dkdkrd:
I believe the Fairbanks-Morse 'Erie-Built' #90 set also pulled a passenger train...but not for long! Did not live up to the FM hype or ATSF rigors.
After a major failure on the Chief, The Santa Fe Erie Built's (90L-A-B)wound up in secondary train service from San Diego-Barstow-LA with occasional trips to Chicago. By the 60's they were in KC-Tulsa service. Plus Santa Fe was already heavily invested with EMD and Alco, so the odd-ball FM's didn't stand a chance.
They were traded in for credit on U25B's in 1963.
While unsuccessful of the Santa Fe, Erie Built's seemed to fair pretty well on the Milwaukee Road.
Rusty
Originally Posted by dkdkrd:
I believe the Fairbanks-Morse 'Erie-Built' #90 set also pulled a passenger train...but not for long! Did not live up to the FM hype or ATSF rigors.
Aw, don't be hard on poor old Number 90.
I don't know how you define "not for long" but 15 years of service is what was expected of first-generation diesels. The 90 ran well, as long as it could see the diesel shop frequently for regular observation and such minor tinkering as might be required, thus the use of the locomotive where it laid over at Barstow and, later, Argentine, the two principal diesel shops. I used to see it on No.24, and it was always running and sounding healthy. Later, when I hired out in engine service on the Los Angeles Division, I worked with many enginemen who had run the 90, and it was the hot-rod among all the rednoses.
The only road failure any of my fellow Engineers could recall was that, once, the dynamic brake on the booster unit caught fire, not a unique experience on first generation diesels of any manufacturer.
Although the cost of operation was high because of the regular minor tinkering, it ran like a striped ape after the early bugs were worked out of it. It was the money and the orphan status that sent the 90 into retirement -- not performance.
A little respect for Number 90, please . . . 
The Santa Fe also had some boxcab passenger diesels that were on their top passenger trains before they bought the streamlined ones.
