B-Units, possibly a daft question!

[Zigzag Canyon]

Hostler controls were minimal.  In the early diesel days, booster units were often considered a sub-unit of a locomotive.  For example, an FT locomotive might have an A-B-B-A arrangement, but it would be considered a single locomotive and would be numbered that way.  Some FTs were semi-permanently linked together with drawbars instead of knuckle couplers.  

[russ p]

APT power cars have very simple what the Americans would call hostler controls 

[Regularity]

3 hours ago, Zigzag Canyon said:

Some FTs were semi-permanently linked together with drawbars instead of knuckle couplers

I was under the impression that FTs were all delivered as semi-permanent A-B units.

Do you mean semi-permanent couplings creating A-B-B-A units? 

[F-UnitMad]

I thought the first FT was a full A-B-B-A set with drawbars (except for the cab ends, obviously) and considered to be just one locomotive. Otherwise the B-units would've had to be "handed" with different couplings at either end, and inevitably one day they'd be the wrong way round

But I might be wrong.

[Mike_Walker]

FT B-units were regarded somewhat differently to the later versions. To avoid unions demanding each unit be treated as a separate locomotive thereby requiring a separate crew, the cab and booster units were, in most cases, coupled by drawbars making them in effect a single unit in the same way as a steam locomotive and tender. For this reason they tended to be numbered the same with the suffix A, B, C and D (or in the case of the Santa Fe L (Lead), B, C, D). Some railroads had proper couplers between the B-units and drawbars only between the A and B units creating A-B+B-A lashups rather than A-B-B-A.

 

There were actually two different FT B-units. The more common is that used in the 4-unit sets which are the same length as the A-unit with a noticeable unused area at one end where the cab would be, the overhang of the body is also greater at this end as on an A-unit the distance between the truck and end of the body is different at each end and this is replicated on the B-unit. A few railroads - the Lackawanna was one - specified A-B-A sets of FT units and these incorporated shorter B units, often called unofficially FT-SB (Short Booster), that were symmetrical similar to the F2B, F3B and subsequent models.

 

Of course, as time wore on and diesels working in multiple unit became the norm, many early F units were modified with conventional couplers throughout enabling them to be used efficiently as circumstances and maintenance required. Some railroads retained the original numbering others renumbered to give each unit, A or B, its own identity.

 

 

The asymmetric layout of the FT B-unit can be seen here.

 

Edited April 10, 2022 by Mike_Walker

[russ p]

16 minutes ago, Mike_Walker said:

FT B-units were regarded somewhat differently to the later versions. To avoid unions demanding each unit be treated as a separate locomotive thereby requiring a separate crew, the cab and booster units were, in most cases, coupled by drawbars making them in effect a single unit in the same way as a steam locomotive and tender. For this reason they tended to be numbered the same with the suffix A, B, C and D (or in the case of the Santa Fe L (Lead), B, C, D). Some railroads had proper couplers between the B-units and drawbars only between the A and B units creating A-B+B-A lashups rather than A-B-B-A.

 

There were actually two different FT B-units. The more common is that used in the 4-unit sets which are the same length as the A-unit with a noticeable unused area at one end where the cab would be, the overhang of the body is also greater at this end as on an A-unit the distance between the truck and end of the body is different at each end and this is replicated on the B-unit. A few railroads - the Lackawanna was one - specified A-B-A sets of FT units and these incorporated shorter B units, often called unofficially FT-SB (Short Booster), that were symmetrical similar to the F2B, F3B and subsequent models.

 

Of course, as time wore on and diesels working in multiple unit became the norm, many early F units were modified with conventional couplers throughout enabling them to be used efficiently as circumstances and maintenance required. Some railroads retained the original numbering others renumbered to give each unit, A or B, its own identity.

 

 

The asymmetric layout of the FT B-unit can be seen here.

 

 

Hard to believe that's  eighty years old. Is it just those two units that exist of 103 now?

[Dr Gerbil-Fritters]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-oolCs5FrM&lc=UgyuWCLWxfQT6d96jGV4AaABAg

[Mike_Walker]

31 minutes ago, russ p said:

 

Hard to believe that's  eighty years old. Is it just those two units that exist of 103 now?

Yes, the A unit is original but the B unit was one which had been converted into a boiler car - I forget its origins - and had ended up at the Virginia Railroad Museum in Roanoke. The A unit had been at the National RR Museum outside St. Louis. EMD brought the two together and cosmetically restored them in 1989 to celebrate their 50th anniversary they were not operational. After that they appeared at several events together before returning to their respective museums. The A unit is well cared for, under cover, at St Louis but photos I've seen of the B unit at Roanoke show it to be in the open and in a sorry state.

[Johann Marsbar]

8 minutes ago, Mike_Walker said:

Yes, the A unit is original but the B unit was one which had been converted into a boiler car - I forget its origins - and had ended up at the Virginia Railroad Museum in Roanoke. The A unit had been at the National RR Museum outside St. Louis. EMD brought the two together and cosmetically restored them in 1989 to celebrate their 50th anniversary they were not operational. After that they appeared at several events together before returning to their respective museums. The A unit is well cared for, under cover, at St Louis but photos I've seen of the B unit at Roanoke show it to be in the open and in a sorry state.

 

This was its condition when I visited Roanoke back in October 2012....

 

 

At least it has a roof over it, but one side is well open to the weather.

 

[F-UnitMad]

12 hours ago, Dr Gerbil-Fritters said:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-oolCs5FrM&lc=UgyuWCLWxfQT6d96jGV4AaABAg

Love the engineer's attitude approaching that grade crossing - why bother with the usual standard long-long-short-long horn warning, when one good, long, relentless blast will do??  

[pH]

37 minutes ago, F-UnitMad said:

Love the engineer's attitude approaching that grade crossing - why bother with the usual standard long-long-short-long horn warning, when one good, long, relentless blast will do??  

 

There is an edit at the beginning of that clip, so it could be the last 'long' of the crossing signal -  as in ''This signal is to be prolonged or repeated until the engine or train occupies the crossing." Different engineers can have quite different interpretations of 'short' and 'long' horn notes.

[alastairq]

A ''don't mess with me'' horn set too.....

[F-UnitMad]

17 hours ago, pH said:

There is an edit at the beginning of that clip, so it could be the last 'long' of the crossing signal -  as in ''This signal is to be prolonged or repeated until the engine or train occupies the crossing."

Maybe - but even if it is the "last long", it's still by far the longest 'last long' I've ever heard..!!

 

Edit - that is not, however, a complaint.!!

Edited October 28, 2020 by F-UnitMad

[Grovenor]

I like the revolving stop signs, not seen that before.

[F-UnitMad]

38 minutes ago, Grovenor said:

I like the revolving stop signs, not seen that before.

They were known as Griswold signals, after their designer.

https://trn.trains.com/news/news-wire/2016/11/04-griswold-sign

[Keith Addenbrooke]

On 27/10/2020 at 22:38, F-UnitMad said:

Love the engineer's attitude approaching that grade crossing - why bother with the usual standard long-long-short-long horn warning, when one good, long, relentless blast will do??  

That clip could also be used in the current discussion about use of B units: how common was an A-B-B-B-B-A lash-up? (Would it have been an A-B-B+B-B-A, if I’ve got the nomenclature right?)
 

I wonder if the horn was deliberate because the train approaches the crossing unsighted round a concealed curve?
 

Keith.

Edited October 29, 2020 by Keith Addenbrooke

[Mike_Walker]

1 hour ago, Keith Addenbrooke said:

That clip could also be used in the current discussion about use of B units: how common was an A-B-B-B-B-A lash-up? (Would it have been an A-B-B+B-B-A, if I’ve got the nomenclature right?)
 

I wonder if the horn was deliberate because the train approaches the crossing unsighted round a concealed curve?
 

Keith.

Those LTV A and B units were all regarded as separate units and were mixed and matched as required although it was almost always a pair of As bracketing a string of Bs. In the early days such could be more widely seen as several roads ordered F units in A-B-A, A-B-B-A or A-B-B sets as required. Where they were fitted with couplers at each end it became common place to lash them up as convenient and not always with an outward facing cab at both ends!

 

There is a strict rule (14-L) requiring the sounding of -- -- o -- approaching all grade crossings with the final blast being continued until the train fully occupies the crossing so in this case the engineer would appear not to be complying. The only exception is where there are two or more very closely spaced crossings where the final blast is continued until the last is occupied or where local ordnances prohibit the use of horns for part or all of the day.

[Keith Addenbrooke]

13 minutes ago, Mike_Walker said:

Those LTV A and B units were all regarded as separate units and were mixed and matched as required although it was almost always a pair of As bracketing a string of Bs. In the early days such could be more widely seen as several roads ordered F units in A-B-A, A-B-B-A or A-B-B sets as required. Where they were fitted with couplers at each end it became common place to lash them up as convenient and not always with an outward facing cab at both ends!

 

There is a strict rule (14-L) requiring the sounding of -- -- o -- approaching all grade crossings with the final blast being continued until the train fully occupies the crossing so in this case the engineer would appear not to be complying. The only exception is where there are two or more very closely spaced crossings where the final blast is continued until the last is occupied or where local ordnances prohibit the use of horns for part or all of the day.

Thanks Mike.  Your answer reminded me there’s a modelling article on the Erie/LTV line in a Kalmbach book: Mid-size track plans for Realistic Layouts (Bernard Kempinski).  You can just see a Griswold crossing sign in a photo on p61 - I only spotted it just now because I was looking for one after seeing the description above.

 

Kempinski also states that the 6-unit lash-ups could still be seen up until 2001, incidentally,

[Dr Gerbil-Fritters]

46 minutes ago, Mike_Walker said:

There is a strict rule (14-L) requiring the sounding of -- -- o -- approaching all grade crossings with the final blast being continued until the train fully occupies the crossing so in this case the engineer would appear not to be complying. The only exception is where there are two or more very closely spaced crossings where the final blast is continued until the last is occupied or where local ordnances prohibit the use of horns for part or all of the day.

 

Would this still apply to a non-common carrier railroad, like LTV Mining?  I was under the impression that FRA rules did not apply to industrial/non common carrier railroads.

[Mike_Walker]

3 hours ago, Dr Gerbil-Fritters said:

 

Would this still apply to a non-common carrier railroad, like LTV Mining?  I was under the impression that FRA rules did not apply to industrial/non common carrier railroads.

In this case yes, it applies on all railroads in all states (and Canadian provinces) so that motorists know a train is coming when they hear a 14-L blast.

[F-UnitMad]

10 hours ago, Mike_Walker said:

 

There is a strict rule (14-L) requiring the sounding of -- -- o -- approaching all grade crossings with the final blast being continued until the train fully occupies the crossing

Out of interest, how long has that rule been around? It must go back to steam days I'd have thought?

[AndrewC]

6 hours ago, Mike_Walker said:

In this case yes, it applies on all railroads in all states (and Canadian provinces) so that motorists know a train is coming when they hear a 14-L blast.

Just to throw a monkey wrench into this, the -- -- 0 -- is also subject to local municipality by laws. For example railway horns are prohibited in over 500 municipalities across Canada & US except in certain circumstances. (idiot on track is one) 

[pH]

39 minutes ago, F-UnitMad said:

Out of interest, how long has that rule been around? It must go back to steam days I'd have thought?

Discussion of the rule, including some history here:

 

https://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?11,2305536

 

An interesting thing mentioned is that the signal used to be

long-long-short-short. Having watched some videos of trains blowing crossing signals, I’m sure I can hear some engineers on eastern railroads (CSX and NS) blowing long-long-short-short-long; the two shorts can be quite distinct. 

[pH]

3 minutes ago, AndrewC said:

Just to throw a monkey wrench into this, the -- -- 0 -- is also subject to local municipality by laws. For example railway horns are prohibited in over 500 municipalities across Canada & US except in certain circumstances. (idiot on track is one) 

I believe railways ask for indemnity from consequences of accidents due to the non-sounding of horns in towns. If the municipality won’t give it, they won’t implement quiet zones.

[Dr Gerbil-Fritters]

In Kearney Ne, the train doesn't blow for the crossing, the crossing blows for the train.

 

I don't know why, and it sounds bl00dy awful.

 

Check it out on Virtual Railfan webcam.

Edited October 29, 2020 by Dr Gerbil-Fritters