Prototype for the C&NW 4-6-0?

Searsport · January 06, 2015, 07:52:50 PM

Hi, I am assuming that Mr B bases his model paint schemes on photos of real locos, even if they are not quite identical to the models. I am puzzling over the "C&NW" 4-6-0. This has as the loco part C.St.P.M&O #237 attached to a medium USRA tender bearing the C&NW herald. Is there a photo out there somewhere?

The C&NW had a controlling interest in the Omaha Road from the 1880s but they did not begin the formal takeover until 1957, by which time the 4-6-0s would have pretty well disappeared. I believe that when Benjamin Heineman took over the C&NW in 1956 he set about scrapping the remaining steam fleet as quickly as possible, which he was able to do because he re-organised locomotive utilisation much more efficiently and turned a motive power shortage into a surplus. So unless this is a preserved loco the window of opportunity for this particular combination must have been very brief.

All the photos of Omaha road 4-6-0s I can find have C.St.P.M&O on the cab side and large numerals on the tender, not a logo. All the photos of C&NW 4-6-0s I can find have: early: C&NWR on the cab side and numerals on the tender, or late: the C&NW logo on the tender and the number on the cab, without initials. They also have the headlight mounted in the middle of the smokebox door, not on top as on the C.St.P.M&O and on the model. I have not been able to precisely identify #237. All the likely candidates seem to be built by Schenectady, not Baldwin.

I would be grateful if anyone could point me to a photo of the real #237. I am minded to simply lose the C&NW logo from the tender and replace it with numerals. Railroad Picture Archive has a very clear photo of C.St.P.M&O #338 which had 63-inch drivers and was of their I-1 class, built 1901-10, which is about right, though the domes are more modern than the model.

Happy New Year,
Bill.

Len · January 06, 2015, 08:05:55 PM

Couldn't find #237, but here's the #239, same markings you describe for the #237:

Larger version at: http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/cnw/cnw-s239dsa.jpg

Len

Searsport · January 07, 2015, 06:15:04 AM

Hi Len, thanks very much. I do have a photo of #239, from Railroad Picture Archive, but that shows it with C&NW on the cab side, a large 239 on the tender, and the tender is a small oil tender, not the medium coal in your photo. See http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=3580565 The text also suggest it is a CNW native, not a C.St.P.M&O, and the photo date of May 1934 supports that, but it is described as a K-1, and I see from Steamlocomotive.com that the K-1s were indeed built for the Omaha road. Clearly CNW locomotive affairs were more complicated than I imagined! The domes on C&NW #239 are in different places, so it has either been rebuilt or scrapped and an Omaha road engine has taken its number.

Thanks for the heads-up on fallenflags.org. I did not know that site existed. I will explore.

Best Regards,
Bill.

Len · January 07, 2015, 08:00:43 AM

Two different locos, with some number overlap going on.

The coal burning #239 was built for CSPM&O, as a Class G-1. It was reclassed as an R-1 when it came under C&NW.

The oil burning #239 is a Class K-1, built for C&NW after the coal burner was scrapped.

Len

Searsport · January 10, 2015, 11:27:24 AM

Hi Len, thanks for your info. I have done further reading and found the following:

On the Fallen Flags website I found C&NW #833. There is no supporting information but #833 looks very like the Baldwin Bachmann have modeled, i.e. the domes are much more the right type of antiquated rather than the smooth domes of the ALCos, though neither this nor the ALCos have their domes in the same places as the model. It also has a shorter tender than the USRA medium coal.

Perhaps more importantly, I have found that the tender logo I had thought to be a C&NW badge and hence related to the merger era is not. I just got a book ?Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis and Omaha Railway 1880-1940 Photo Archive?. On page 47 is a photo of a system map dated 1895 which bears the logo. It is not quite as the later C&NW version, it has ?North Western? across the bar, and ?Line? below, but ?The? above where the C&NW put ?Chicago?. Apparently this early logo was adopted by four railroads as joint branding to suggest to customers a larger integrated system. It says on the map:

?These roads, advertised as ?The North-Western Line,? have a total of 7,966 miles, as follows:
Chicago, St Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha R?y - 1,492
Chicago & North-Western Railway ? 5,066
Sioux City & Pacific Railroad ? 107
Fremont, Elkhorn & Missouri Valley Railroad ? 1.301

On page 98 of the book the logo appears on the window of the Minneapolis city ticket office in 1912 with the general wording, i.e. ?The? not ?Chicago?. I don?t know if this was a joint ticket office. On page 84 it appears painted on the ground at Emerson, Nebraska, circa 1905, next to C.StP.M.& O. and "EMERSON"

In the book the logo only appears on the tenders of class K1 4-6-0 locos, presumably because they were passenger locos. The photos show that these ALCo 4-6-0s were delivered painted with C.St.P.M.&.O. on the cab and large numerals on the tenders, and that the number migrated to the cab and the logo appeared on the tender later, perhaps in the late 1930s, at least on K1 class #230 and #244, though those photos are not dated. There is also a photo of K1 #235 with the cab lettering / numerals as on the Bachmann models and the tender apparently blank, unless it is hidden by dirt. The numbers Bachmann have used are #236 (HO DCC Ready ? Spectrum 82306), #237 (N, DCC fitted ? Spectrum 51456), #238 (HO DCC + Sound ? Spectrum 84906).

Best Regards,
Bill.

Searsport · January 10, 2015, 11:33:03 AM

You will gather from my previous reply that the message board is unable to cope with quotation marks, apostrophes, or dashes. One wonders why not in the 21st Century, maybe there is a deep technical reason. I am using a classic Windows keyboard.

Bill.

Len · January 10, 2015, 12:21:44 PM

Interesting. I just did a "quick and dirty" check for the #239 coal vs oil info I found. I'm mainly into Eastern and Southern roads. My interests in the Northwest area runs more to Northern Pacific and Great Northern passenger service.

Are you typing directly in the message box, or using an external editor and doing a 'copy & paste' into the message box? The weird symbols look like what you get pasting a full blown word processor document into something looking for straight text.

Len

Desertdweller · January 10, 2015, 12:24:18 PM

I have seen a couple of real R-1's, but they are different from 237 & 239. These locos (one at the Forney Transportation Museum at Denver, one at Mid-Continent Museum at North Freedom, WI) look larger than 239 and have canted cylinders and steam chests.

These were among the last, if not the last, CNW steam engines in operation. In their lives, they served the roles later occupied by GP7's and GP9's. In fact, that was what replaced them. They (like the Geeps) were mainline dual-purpose engines when new, then wound up on branches.

I have ridden behind the North Freedom engine, and one of my friends, a fellow retired loco engineer, used to run it.

Les

Searsport · January 10, 2015, 04:54:15 PM

Hi Len, I type short messages direct onto the board and longer ones that take more time in Word, then cut and paste. Maybe that is it - Word is adding something? I have typed this direct, so will see how the dash and question mark come out. However, even the messages created in word look OK on preview, it is only after they are posted that the characters change. ' " -

Bill.

Len · January 10, 2015, 08:02:14 PM

That's the problem. Word special characters aren't straight ANSI/ASCII text, and can show up strangely when posted to web sites that are looking for that. Better to use EditPad Lite (it's free) or NotePad for straight text editing if you're going to copy and paste from offline documents.

Len

dstuttgen · July 05, 2015, 01:09:03 AM

Quote from: Len on January 06, 2015, 08:05:55 PM
Couldn't find #237, but here's the #239, same markings you describe for the #237:

Larger version at: http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/cnw/cnw-s239dsa.jpg

Len

Here's #237, but she doesn't look like my Bachmann and she's a Schnectady not Baldwin. Really confusing!

Len · July 05, 2015, 07:30:07 AM

I've found most model RR manufacturers use a bit of "creative license" with their locos.

A particular model may be a perfect copy of a specific loco, used by a specific railroad, down to the last rivet. But it's not unheard of for the same model to show up in other paint schemes, for railroads that used similar locos. Even though there might be some differences in sand domes, feed water pumps, etc.

That's why I keep the detail parts catalogs handy.

Len

electrical whiz kid · July 05, 2015, 08:10:48 AM

Len;
Comparing the photos, I also have this engine. I would like to do a "modification" to match C&NW#239. Parts like steam dome, etc; are not a problem. It appears, though, that #239 sits higher than the model. Have you done this modification? If so, what did you use to accomplish this?

Rich C.

Trainman203 · July 05, 2015, 08:54:11 AM

The Bachmann engine is nothing like the c&nw engine. the old Varney Casey Jones 4-6-0 was a lot closer. In 1963 or so a guy ran an article in Model Railroader on how to make it "closer" to,the C&Nw engine .

Len · July 05, 2015, 09:10:17 AM

Rich - The only "height" modification I've ever done was long ago changing a 4-6-2 from the 73" drivers it came with to the 69" drivers the "fast freight" version actually used. Other than that, no, I haven't really gotten into changing loco heights.

Len

News:

Prototype for the C&NW 4-6-0?

Trainman203