--- In STMFC@..., guycwilber@... wrote:
Greg Martin wrote:Along the same lines of inquiry, *if* fines were levied by whatever procedures were in place, it would be quite the find if records were still extant for the 1945-1960 period that showed how many times the NYC was fined for Pacemaker cars off home rails with deficient reporting marks.
From what I've read, the decision in 1955 to start painting full reporting marks on shopped Pacemaker cars might have been because of several reasons. One might have been flack the Central received for cars that had, for whatever reason, drifted off home rails with insufficient reporting marks. There is also the 1954 takeover of Central management by the Young/Perlman team. Al Perlman was interested in going in a different direction i.e. Flexi-van. Then, there is also the fact that the whole Pacemaker service concept had never met initial revenue expectations - every section of Interstate highway that opened was another nail in its coffin.
The 1955 decision might very well have been taken from a combination of all these reasons.
By 1960 with the program to mass renumber the 74000 series cars back in to the general boxcar pool, the Central was totally committed to the Flexi-van route for this sort of traffic.
Under Perlman, cars that still had an adequate paint job were, generally speaking, not going to be repainted just for "show". Perlman was more interested in results than appearances, and definitely *not* interested in wasting money for nothing. So the Pacemaker scheme lasted a long time after Pacemaker service itself had been discontinued.