Home Open Account Help 399 users online

Nostalgia & History > AT&SF #300, where the Warbonnets roamed - 1969


Date: 08/27/14 05:51
AT&SF #300, where the Warbonnets roamed - 1969
Author: valmont

Took this @ Raton, NM on July 14, 1969 ... looks right at home.




Date: 08/27/14 06:24
Re: AT&SF #300, where the Warbonnets roamed - 1969
Author: santafedan

She needs a face wash.



Date: 08/27/14 07:09
Re: AT&SF #300, where the Warbonnets roamed - 1969
Author: 4-12-2

Great photo, thanks for sharing. Still some steam-era facilities in place. Am sure you're aware that some continue to remain between Raton and Trinidad. Gorgeous stretch of railroad!

John Bush
Omaha



Date: 08/27/14 22:04
Re: AT&SF #300, where the Warbonnets roamed - 1969
Author: BCHellman

Where are the FP45s or passenger-geared F45s? Were there not enough to cover #17/#18 and #1/#2 ?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/27/14 22:05 by BCHellman.



Date: 08/28/14 03:24
Re: AT&SF #300, where the Warbonnets roamed - 1969
Author: Evan_Werkema

BCHellman Wrote:

> Where are the FP45s or passenger-geared F45s?

For reasons unknown, the passenger-geared, steam-line-equipped F45's didn't appear much on passenger trains until 1970. The FP45's were on the "other" train valmont caught at Raton that day:

http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?11,3492777

There's been some discussion in the past of just which passenger trains he saw - three westbounds, none of which appear to be carrying visible green flags or lights:

http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?11,2706767
http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?11,2722672



Date: 08/28/14 21:50
Re: AT&SF #300, where the Warbonnets roamed - 1969
Author: BCHellman

Evan_Werkema Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> BCHellman Wrote:
>
> > Where are the FP45s or passenger-geared F45s?
>
> For reasons unknown, the passenger-geared,
> steam-line-equipped F45's didn't appear much on
> passenger trains until 1970. The FP45's were on
> the "other" train valmont caught at Raton that
> day:
>
> http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?11,
> 3492777
>
> There's been some discussion in the past of just
> which passenger trains he saw - three westbounds,
> none of which appear to be carrying visible green
> flags or lights:
>
> http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?11,
> 2706767
> http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?11,
> 2722672


In 1969 there were two scheduled westward trains through Raton, #17 El Cap/Super and #23 Grand Canyon. Three westward passenger trains are photographed, none showing green for a second section and none showing white designating an extra.

So either the date is wrong on one of the photos or the Santa Fe crew on one of the trains is operating in violations of the rules, which could (and should) get them fired.



Date: 08/28/14 22:48
Re: AT&SF #300, where the Warbonnets roamed - 1969
Author: bnsfbob

BCHellman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Evan_Werkema Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > BCHellman Wrote:
> >
> > > Where are the FP45s or passenger-geared F45s?
>
> >
> > For reasons unknown, the passenger-geared,
> > steam-line-equipped F45's didn't appear much on
> > passenger trains until 1970. The FP45's were
> on
> > the "other" train valmont caught at Raton that
> > day:
> >
> >
> http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?11,
>
> > 3492777
> >
> > There's been some discussion in the past of
> just
> > which passenger trains he saw - three
> westbounds,
> > none of which appear to be carrying visible
> green
> > flags or lights:
> >
> >
> http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?11,
>
> > 2706767
> >
> http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?11,
>
> > 2722672
>
>
> In 1969 there were two scheduled westward trains
> through Raton, #17 El Cap/Super and #23 Grand
> Canyon. Three westward passenger trains are
> photographed, none showing green for a second
> section and none showing white designating an
> extra.
>
> So either the date is wrong on one of the photos
> or the Santa Fe crew on one of the trains is
> operating in violations of the rules, which could
> (and should) get them fired.

This being CTC (TCS), are flags required? I know that Santa Fe kept the flags up in the CTC segments, so it does seem strange.

Bob



Date: 08/28/14 23:18
Re: AT&SF #300, where the Warbonnets roamed - 1969
Author: mundo

Flags fell off!



Date: 08/29/14 02:01
Re: AT&SF #300, where the Warbonnets roamed - 1969
Author: BCHellman

bnsfbob Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> BCHellman Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Evan_Werkema Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > BCHellman Wrote:
> > >
> > > > Where are the FP45s or passenger-geared
> F45s?
> >
> > >
> > > For reasons unknown, the passenger-geared,
> > > steam-line-equipped F45's didn't appear much
> on
> > > passenger trains until 1970. The FP45's were
> > on
> > > the "other" train valmont caught at Raton
> that
> > > day:
> > >
> > >
> >
> http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?11,
>
> >
> > > 3492777
> > >
> > > There's been some discussion in the past of
> > just
> > > which passenger trains he saw - three
> > westbounds,
> > > none of which appear to be carrying visible
> > green
> > > flags or lights:
> > >
> > >
> >
> http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?11,
>
> >
> > > 2706767
> > >
> >
> http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?11,
>
> >
> > > 2722672
> >
> >
> > In 1969 there were two scheduled westward
> trains
> > through Raton, #17 El Cap/Super and #23 Grand
> > Canyon. Three westward passenger trains are
> > photographed, none showing green for a second
> > section and none showing white designating an
> > extra.
> >
> > So either the date is wrong on one of the
> photos
> > or the Santa Fe crew on one of the trains is
> > operating in violations of the rules, which
> could
> > (and should) get them fired.
>
> This being CTC (TCS), are flags required? I know
> that Santa Fe kept the flags up in the CTC
> segments, so it does seem strange.
>
> Bob

Yes, according to the rules.

The 1966 Rule Book was in effect at the time of the photos.

Rule 20: All sections, except the last, will display two green flags and two green lights in places provided for that purpose on the front of the engine.

Rule 21: Extras and work extras will display two white lights in the places provided for that purpose on the front of the engine.

Rule 501: Trains entering TCS limits will continue the display of classification signals previously authorized.

Nothing is mentioned in the Special Instructions about granting relief from Rule 20 or 21 in CTC territory on the Second District (La Junta to Raton) or the Third District (Raton to Las Vegas) in Colorado Division #6; June 1, 1968.

Besides the rules we've seen photos of passenger trains in Raton during this period carrying green flags and green lights. And since there is Timetable and Train Order method of operation on both Districts, proper classification signals would be necessary at some point.

Train 23 was due Raton at 6.13AM. Train 17 was due 11.40AM. It's possible that one of the trains in the photos is a late #23 or even a last section of #23. That might account for one of the trains not having green or being run as an extra. Another one of the trains is the only or last section of #17. So that means that one of the trains was either not on the same day, or was in violation of Rule 20 or Rule 21.

I'm inclined to believe that the Santa Fe wouldn't have played loose with the rules on a passenger train. After all, there may be opposing extras relying on the fact that the last section has cleared and they can safely proceed east, or a maintenance-of-way-crew can now safely set on the tracks.



Date: 08/29/14 02:17
Re: AT&SF #300, where the Warbonnets roamed - 1969
Author: lwilton

I haven't looked at the pictures in question, but I note from the rules recital above that only white lights were required for an extra, not flags. Is it possible one is running extra, and the lights just aren't particularly obvious in the photograph?



[ Share Thread on Facebook ] [ Search ] [ Start a New Thread ] [ Back to Thread List ] [ <Newer ] [ Older> ] 
Page created in 0.0948 seconds