--- In STMFC@..., Richard Hendrickson <rhendrickson@o...>
wrote:
"For example, eastbound SFRD reefers arriving at the Santa Fe's
Corwith Yard in South Chicago were switched immediately to the
Indiana Harbor Belt, which would ice the cars if necessary at Blue
Island and then forward them to the Erie at Hammond, IN for 10
p.m. departure to the New York City area and New England, to the
Grand Trunk Western for southern Canadian destinations, or to the
B&O for mid-Atlantic destinations."

No, it did not quite work this way. Santa Fe would set
the IHB cars out at Mc Cook on the way into "Southwest"
Chicago's Corwith Yard. The cars for the Grand Trunk
Western at Chicago were taken right to the Elsdon Yard via
the IN tracks from Corwith Yard and iced by the GTW for
a very fast departure on #492 (day), or #490 (night) for
Canada and New England. If Santa Fe (a Belt Railroad of
Chicago owner) ever had to use the BRC for perishables in
Chicago thay were in trouble, as BRC was always slower than
the IHB.
The IHB was so good at making the connections in Chicago
with "Hot Stuff" that nobody used the BRC unless thay had to.
The IHB had clerks in other railroad yards offices in the
Chicago area to expedite the handling of perishables. Thay
would receive, stamp the waybills, and wire ahead icing
instructions to Blue Island yard, as an IHB H-5 2-8-2 was
standing ready on the yard leads with it's caboose to
tie on and go as the other railroads road engine was cut
off. I used to here old timers talk about how they did it,
and it was impressive at the Milwaukee Raod. Other roads
also had special crews called as extra "roustabout" jods
at yards to take perishable to other railroads as needed
by the roads yardmaster. C&NW would call 5 extra crews
a night at Proviso Yard alone! This was the good old days
of railroading when things got done as a matter of good
Business. I might add that Santa Fe was not known as
a particularly fast railroad in Chicago, or for having
very fast freight schedules to the West coast from Chicago
in the 1930's and 40's. This can be seen in a recent issue
of the Santa Fe modelers "Warbonnet" featuring the fast
freight schedules and services, if you would like to call
it that. Santa Fe was running most of the railroad with
old 2-8-2's and it shows in the timings over the road.


Regards,

Jerry Stewart
Chicago, Ill.

Jerry Stewart wrote:

I might add that Santa Fe was not known as
a particularly fast railroad in Chicago, or for having
very fast freight schedules to the West coast from Chicago
in the 1930's and 40's. This can be seen in a recent issue
of the Santa Fe modelers "Warbonnet" featuring the fast
freight schedules and services, if you would like to call
it that. Santa Fe was running most of the railroad with
old 2-8-2's and it shows in the timings over the road.

Omigawd! And here our friend Richard has been brainwashing us that Uncle John was ALWAYS a fast freight road!! Will wonders never cease?

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2942 Linden Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@...
Publishers of books on railroad history

Tony Thompson wrote

Omigawd! And here our friend Richard has been brainwashing us
that Uncle John was ALWAYS a fast freight road!! Will wonders never
cease?

What wonder? I've been saying that for years... :-)

Tim O.

--- In STMFC@..., Anthony Thompson <thompson@s...> wrote:
" Omigawd! And here our friend Richard has been brainwashing
us
that Uncle John was ALWAYS a fast freight road!! Will wonders never
cease?"

Tony, before a lot of people dump on me about a favorite
railroad of theirs in the Chicago area having a hot freight
schedule from this very important city, it should be said that
almost every railroad here did something to offer good service
to there customer base.
Examples are easy to find, Erie offering a dedicated
perishable train to the N.Y. and N.J. market, and AT&SF
offering some kind of overnight merchandise service to Kansas
City. And why not thay had the best route to it.
But make NO mistake about it, AT&SF was not the fast
freight likes of NKP, IC, and GTW in the steam era.

Regards,

Jerry Stewart
Chicago, Ill.

--- In STMFC@..., Tim O'Connor <timboconnor@c...> wrote:
Tony Thompson wrote

"Omigawd! And here our friend Richard has been brainwashing us
that Uncle John was ALWAYS a fast freight road!! Will wonders never
cease?"

"What wonder? I've been saying that for years... :-)"

Tim O.

You know Tim, Hot Air Ballooning is very popular on the
West Coast... :~)

Regards,

Jerry Stewart
Chcicago, Ill.

Jerry wrote:

--- In STMFC@..., Anthony Thompson <thompson@s...> wrote:
" Omigawd! And here our friend Richard has been brainwashing
us
that Uncle John was ALWAYS a fast freight road!! Will wonders never
cease?"

Tony, before a lot of people dump on me about a favorite
railroad of theirs in the Chicago area having a hot freight
schedule from this very important city, it should be said that
almost every railroad here did something to offer good service
to there customer base. Examples are easy to find, Erie offering a dedicated
perishable train to the N.Y. and N.J. market, and AT&SF
offering some kind of overnight merchandise service to Kansas
City. And why not thay had the best route to it. But make NO mistake about it, AT&SF was not the fast
freight likes of NKP, IC, and GTW in the steam era.

There may be two measurements of "fast service" in the statistics compiled by the ICC's Bureau of Transport Economics and Statistics for railroads: - the first, the average MPH of all freight trains on a line; and the other, the average of car miles per day per car on line. These statistics, however, are somewhat biased in favor of the bridge or long haul lines at the expense of those lines originating and terminating traffic. Below is a table of selected roads' average MPH and car miles per day ranking their avg. MPH from low to high in 1947:

Road Avg. MPH Car Mi/Car/Day
US RR's 16.4 46.9 Note: Average of all Class I Roads
PRR 13.5 31.1
NYC 15.4 40.8
SP - Pac 15.6 67.0
ERIE 16.4 59.8
IC 17.2 54.8
LV 17.8 33.5
NKP 19.2 77.6
SSW 19.4 97.5
ATSF 19.6 70.0
GTW 19.6 32.2
SLSF 19.6 58.4
WAB 19.7 52.2
UP 20.0 79.4
T&NO 20.6 62.8
CNO&TP 21.5 76.9

I have no idea whether this data will settle any speed wars, but at least the talk will not be as much about myth as it is about numbers.

Tim Gilbert

Tim Gilbert's data shows:

NKP 19.2 77.6
SSW 19.4 97.5
ATSF 19.6 70.0
GTW 19.6 32.2
SLSF 19.6 58.4
WAB 19.7 52.2
UP 20.0 79.4
T&NO 20.6 62.8
CNO&TP 21.5 76.9

I was believing it until I got to CNO&TP. Tim...the Rathole? [ at least a significant part ]. Come on. Could this be due to Southern's move to dieselize?

Wearing my Admin hat, the concept of the STMFC is that information is presented and the chips fall where they may. However, opinion is fine, no "dumping" is allowed...meaning that no one can be penalized for having one.

Now taking off Admin hat, I'll offer this about Jerry's view of the ATSF:

I think I'm going to disagree...to an extent. First, we know from Lloyd Stagner's superb article about the Santa Fe 2-10-4 that Santa Fe freight schedules were reduced significantly in the summer of 1930 as a result of truck competition. Union Pacific was stimulated as well. Thus, ATSF transit time was reduced from ninth morning to seventh morning from California to Chicago. Green fruit trains eastbound were scheduled between the 677 miles from Belen to Wellington in as fast a time as 31 hrs 45 minutes as opposed to the previous 44 hrs 35 minutes. Normal time was 38 hrs 20 minutes but the faster schedule allowed time to be made up in the event of a delay in origination in Cal. At that time, Santa Fe was dependent more on 2-10-2s west of Illinois than 2-8-2s. With the introduction of faster frt schedules, either lighter, shorter trains were in order or faster, more powerful power. Madame Queen, 2-10-4 #5000, was one answer and was given 50 mph speed limits compared to 40 mph of the 3800 class 2-10-2s. In 1938 the 5001 2-10-4 class arrived and freight train speeds were scheduled at 50 mph with a maximum speed limit of 65mph for the ten engines of this class which operated primarily on the Pecos Div in New Mexico although they saw service in other locations west of Argentine. After the 25 additional 5011 class arrived, 2-10-4s were active in most areas between Missouri and Cal. The primary companion was not 2-8-2s but EMD FT diesels. What might be confusing was the effect of WW2 on frt train schedules. With the tremendous increase in traffic, the time of transit from California to Chicago dropped again, not only on the Santa Fe but on the other routes as well. Stagner points out that on March 2, 1946 freight schedules were returned to the prewar seventh morning delivery ones between Chicago and the west coast.

Mike Brock

Hi
Chicago still is still a slow place. CN and BNSF just announced that they are taking their interchange out of Chicago proper.
John Force

Mike Brock wrote:

Tim Gilbert's data shows

Data was compiled by the ICC's Bureau of Transport Economics and Statistics, and merely transferred to a spreadsheet by me.

NKP 19.2 77.6
SSW 19.4 97.5
ATSF 19.6 70.0
GTW 19.6 32.2
SLSF 19.6 58.4
WAB 19.7 52.2
UP 20.0 79.4
T&NO 20.6 62.8
CNO&TP 21.5 76.9

I was believing it until I got to CNO&TP. Tim...the Rathole? [ at least a significant part ]. Come on. Could this be due to Southern's move to dieselize?

No Mike, the Rathole's high MPH was more of a function of having little local traffic in comparison with the through traffic. In 1940, the Rathole's average MPH was 23.1; in 1943, 20.8; in 1946, 21.3; in 1947, 21.5; in 1949, 22.0; in 1952, 22.4; and in 1955, 22.2.

Wearing my Admin hat, the concept of the STMFC is that information is presented and the chips fall where they may. However, opinion is fine, no "dumping" is allowed...meaning that no one can be penalized for having one.

Now taking off Admin hat, I'll offer this about Jerry's view of the ATSF:

I think I'm going to disagree...to an extent. First, we know from Lloyd Stagner's superb article about the Santa Fe 2-10-4 that Santa Fe freight schedules were reduced significantly in the summer of 1930 as a result of truck competition. Union Pacific was stimulated as well. Thus, ATSF transit time was reduced from ninth morning to seventh morning from California to Chicago. Green fruit trains eastbound were scheduled between the 677 miles from Belen to Wellington in as fast a time as 31 hrs 45 minutes as opposed to the previous 44 hrs 35 minutes. Normal time was 38 hrs 20 minutes but the faster schedule allowed time to be made up in the event of a delay in origination in Cal. At that time, Santa Fe was dependent more on 2-10-2s west of Illinois than 2-8-2s. With the introduction of faster frt schedules, either lighter, shorter trains were in order or faster, more powerful power. Madame Queen, 2-10-4 #5000, was one answer and was given 50 mph speed limits compared to 40 mph of the 3800 class 2-10-2s. In 1938 the 5001 2-10-4 class arrived and freight train speeds were scheduled at 50 mph with a maximum speed limit of 65mph for the ten engines of this class which operated primarily on the Pecos Div in New Mexico although they saw service in other locations west of Argentine. After the 25 additional 5011 class arrived, 2-10-4s were active in most areas between Missouri and Cal. The primary companion was not 2-8-2s but EMD FT diesels. What might be confusing was the effect of WW2 on frt train schedules. With the tremendous increase in traffic, the time of transit from California to Chicago dropped again, not only on the Santa Fe but on the other routes as well. Stagner points out that on March 2, 1946 freight schedules were returned to the prewar seventh morning delivery ones between Chicago and the west coast.

The decline in freight train speeds during WW II was primarily due to congestion on line.

High running speeds do not mean necessarily fast service - cars have to get through the yards, too. By 1950, the ERIE, DL&W & NYC all had 2nd morning arrival (36 hours) arrival for the 900-1,000 mile New York to Chicago service (vs. the seventh morning (156 hour transit time) for the Pacific Coast - Chicago runs); therefore locomotive power may not be the entire answer.

So far as I can determine, there is no good statistic to measure how much time cars spent in yards being classified and waiting for connections. In terms of a total road, the percent of time cars were moving can be calculated by the formula car miles per car per day divided by average MPH times 24 hours, but this formula is rather crude. It includes the time spent while the car was in surplus, being loaded and unloaded. Still in 1947, the average percent of cars moving at any one time on Class I roads was 12.2%. Certain roads had higher "percents moving" than the national average including the SSW (20.9%); WM (19.1% - the Wild Mary preferred to keep cars on the road rather than in yards - their avg. MPH was only 10.6 vs. the 16.0 national average MPH); SP-Pac Lines (17.8%); NKP (16.8%); UP (16.5%); ERIE (15.2%); CNO&TP (14.9%); ATSF (14.9%); IC ( 13.2%) and T&NO (12.7%). Lower than the 12.2% national average were the WAB (11.0%), NYC (11.0%) and PRR (9.6%).

Tim Gilbert

Tim Gilbert wrote:

There may be two measurements of "fast service" in the statistics
compiled by the ICC's Bureau of Transport Economics and Statistics for
railroads: - the first, the average MPH of all freight trains on a line;
and the other, the average of car miles per day per car on line. These
statistics, however, are somewhat biased in favor of the bridge or long
haul lines at the expense of those lines originating and terminating
traffic.

Of course. The greater the number of branch lines and local originations of traffic, the slower the AVERAGE of train speed. The percentage of cars moving may be a better measure of how energetically the railroad moved its business.
At the same time, Tim, I think "reputation" matters too. Shippers inevitably made some decisions based on reputation, whether the repute was accurate or not. Santa Fe worked hard, and I think successfully, to publicize themselves as providing "fast freight service" and in the marketplace, that counts too. I'd doubt whether that many shippers perused the data from the Bureau of Transport Economics and Statistics.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2942 Linden Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@...
Publishers of books on railroad history

Tony Thompson wrote

Shippers inevitably made some decisions based on reputation, whether
the repute was accurate or not. Santa Fe worked hard, and I think
successfully, to publicize themselves as providing "fast freight
service" and in the marketplace, that counts too.

Tony I think there is no question that Santa Fe was competitive with
the Sunset, LA&SL and Overland routes. None of those went all the way
to Chicago, which was always an advantage timewise. But it's all
relative, ain't it?

Tim:
Statistics are misleading when based on total car miles because of the
impact of "specialty" and reserve cars on the totals. For example, during
the steam freight car period, the Santa Fe was one of the largest hauler of
cattle in stock cars. Stock travel is, however, highly seasonal, resulting
in a lower car mph than may have been seen watching the rails.
One relevant, but difficult to find, statistic, is terminal delay time.
This gives a good sense of how much time a car is spending "in the yard."
In conjunction with the other statistics, it will give a feel for the
railroad's "over the road" performance.

Eric Hiser
Phoenix, AZ